Bill C-15, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025, is poised to revise Canada's greenwashing framework under the Competition Act[1] (the "Act"). The proposed changes aim to reduce uncertainty and litigation risk for businesses making environmental claims, while maintaining key consumer protections.
Bill C-15 has now completed its second reading in the House of Commons and is on track to be passed into law in the coming weeks. Among the legislative amendments proposed are revisions to the Act that would walk back certain of the anti-greenwashing provisions introduced with the passage of Bill C-59 in 2024 (the "Greenwashing Amendments").[2]
The Greenwashing Amendments were introduced to dissuade businesses from making – and benefiting from – unproven claims about the environmental benefits of their products or business activities by requiring that businesses first adequately test or substantiate such claims. Businesses that failed to do so could face enforcement actions, including proceedings before the Competition Tribunal initiated by private litigants pursuant to expanded rights of private action that came into effect in June of this year. We discussed these new obligations and the consequences of failing to meet them in our previous articles:
- Amendments to Competition Act Increase Consequences for Greenwashing
- Key Updates Released by Competition Bureau Regarding Greenwashing and the New Private Litigant Regime
The Amendments: Context and Purpose
The Greenwashing Amendments resulted in significant uncertainty about the exposure faced by businesses arising from such claims and how businesses could advertise positive efforts being undertaken relating to the environment (e.g., by using renewable sources of energy during production) without facing significant risk. The requirement that claims about the environmental benefits of a business or business activity be supported by "adequate and proper substantiation in accordance with internationally recognized methodology" has proven especially troublesome, with guidance from the Competition Bureau offering only minimal clarity.[3]
Confusion about the nature and extent of businesses' obligations, coupled with concerns that failing to meet these obligations would leave businesses vulnerable to increased scrutiny from private litigants in addition to the Bureau itself, has caused some businesses to shy away from relying on their "green" policies as a point of competitive distinction. According to the Department of Finance Canada, some businesses have even begun to slow or reverse their environmental protection efforts in response to the Greenwashing Amendments.[4]
Proposed Legislative Rollback Under Bill C-15 Increases Clarity
In an effort to redress these unintended consequences, Bill C-15 proposes amendments to the Act that would curb some aspects of the Greenwashing Amendments while leaving most protections intact. These amendments are:
- removing the requirement, in paragraph 74.01(1)(b.2) of the Act, that claims about the environmental benefits of a business or business activity be supported by adequate and proper substantiation "in accordance with internationally recognized methodology" and
- removing private litigants' ability to seek leave to bring claims before the Competition Tribunal related to alleged contraventions of paragraph 74.01(1)(b.2) of the Act regarding claims about the environmental benefits of a business or business activity.[5]
The proposed amendments alleviate some of the uncertainty faced by businesses unsure of how to interpret the requirement that claims about their environmental business or business activity be substantiated. The revised language of paragraph 74.01(1)(b.2) proposed in Bill C-15 more closely resembles the language of paragraph 74.01(1)(b.1), which requires that claims about the environmental benefits of a product be supported by "adequate and proper" testing, without reference to specific hallmarks like conformity with international practices.
Although there is no judicial guidance on the meaning of "adequate and proper substantiation" as proposed for paragraph 74.01(1)(b.2) in Bill C-15, the courts have interpreted the phrase "adequate and proper testing" in the context of paragraph 74.01(1)(b) of the Act, which addresses product performance claims.[6] The proposed amendments would cause the proposed language of paragraph 74.01(1)(b.2) to more closely align with other provisions for which some interpretive guidance exists.
Reduced Private Enforcement
Importantly, removing the ability of private litigants to seek leave to bring claims before the Competition Tribunal under s. 74.01(1)(b.2) regarding the environmental benefits of a business or business activity limits the ability of public interest groups to take advantage of the Greenwashing Amendments to target businesses. However, pertaining to the Greenwashing Amendments, private litigants will still be able to seek leave to bring claims about a product's environmental benefits, as well as to seek private enforcement of claims that fall under the general false and misleading advertising provisions that pertain to a business or its activities and a product's environmental benefits such that all risk of private enforcement is not dissipated.
Takeaways
The amendments contained in Bill C-15 will alleviate some of the concerns that may be deterring businesses from marketing – and investing in – efforts to make their business and business activities more environmentally friendly. Parliament's awareness of and attempt to redress the chilling effect caused by uncertainty about the new greenwashing rules is reassuring and will create greater clarity for businesses.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
