- with readers working within the Automotive industries
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld complaints against three major fashion brands – Nike, Lacoste, and Superdry – over misleading environmental claims in their advertising. The rulings, published on 3 December 2025, form part of a wider investigation into greenwashing in the retail fashion sector.
Nike
A paid Google ad for Nike promoted "Nike Tennis Polo Shirts
[...] Sustainable Materials." The ASA found the claim
ambiguous and unqualified, likely leading consumers to believe the
products had no negative environmental impact across their life
cycle. While Nike said its polo shirts contained at least 75%
recycled materials, the ASA concluded this did not substantiate an
absolute sustainability claim. The ad breached CAP Code rules on
misleading advertising, substantiation, and environmental
claims.
Lacoste
Lacoste faced scrutiny over website and social media content
describing children's clothing products as "sustainable
clothing." The ASA ruled that these broad, unqualified terms
were likely to mislead, as they implied significant environmental
benefits without clear explanation or evidence covering the full
life cycle. The brand failed to provide adequate substantiation for
these claims.
Superdry (Supergroup)
Superdry's ad stated: "Sustainable Style. Unlock a
wardrobe that combines style and sustainability" and did not
include qualifying information explaining the basis of the terms
"sustainable" and "sustainability". The ASA
considered the term "sustainable", in the context of the
ad, was likely to be understood as meaning that all Superdry
clothes, shoes and accessories, across their entire life cycle,
would at the very least have no detrimental impact on the
environment. The ASA concluded that the basis of Superdry's
claim had not been made clear, its meaning was unlikely to be
understood, and the ASA had not seen evidence to support it. It
therefore concluded the ad was likely to mislead.
ASA's warning to brands
The ASA has reminded advertisers that environmental claims must be
clear, specific, and supported by robust evidence, particularly
when using absolute terms like "sustainable." Failure to
do so risks misleading consumers and breaching advertising
rules.
Key takeaways
The ads in these complaints were identified for investigation
following intelligence gathering by the ASA's Active Ad
Monitoring system which uses AI to proactively survey ads in
specific sectors. It is possible that we could see more decisions
along these lines as the ASA's focus on this area continues.
Negativity around unsustainable practices, and misleading consumers
of such or at least failing to be clear, can be highly
damaging.
Fashion brands should therefore review the claims they are making regarding the sustainability of their garments and ensure all information is clear and accurate in light of these new ASA decisions. Of particular importance will be ensuring there is evidence to back up claims, particularly when using an absolute claim, and also ensuring the full lifecycle of the product is considered.
If you would like advice on compliance with the CAP Code please reach out to us.
The full decisions can be found here:
https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/lacoste-e-commerce-a25-1309097-lacoste-e-commerce.html
https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/nike-retail-bv-a25-1309100-nike-retail-bv.html
https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/supergroup-internet-ltd-a25-1309101-supergroup-internet-ltd.html
The CAP Code required that the basis of environmental claims must be clear, the meaning of all terms must be clear, and that absolute environmental claims must be supported by a high level of substantiation. Claims must be based on the full life cycle of the advertised product, unless the ad stated otherwise.
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.
