Paris Court issues landmark greenwashing ruling against TotalEnergies
17 Nov 2025
The ruling
On 23 October 2025, the Paris Judicial Court has partially upheld claims brought by Greenpeace France, Les Amis de la Terre France and Notre Affaire à Tous against TotalEnergies, finding that certain statements on the company’s French consumer website regarding its “ambition” to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 and to be “a major actor in the energy transition” constituted misleading commercial practices.
The Court ordered the removal of the incriminated statements from TotalEnergies’ French website, the publication of the judgment’s operative part on the site’s homepage for 180 days and awarded each claimant association €23,000 in damages and legal fees. The remainder of the claims - targeting statements about fossil gas and agrofuels, and broader requests for injunctive relief on ecological harmn - were dismissed.
Background and context
The case originates from a 2022 action by NGOs Greenpeace France, Les Amis de la Terre France and Notre Affaire à Tous challenging TotalEnergies’ 2021 rebranding and related climate communications.
The associations alleged misleading messaging on three fronts: (1) carbon-neutrality and “major actor” transition claims, (2) statements valorising fossil gas, and (3) claims about the environmental performance of agrofuels. The defendants responded that most messages were informational or institutional rather than commercial and that references to “ambition” did not amount to enforceable environmental commitments under consumer law.
The Court applied French consumer law (Articles L.121-1 et seq. of the Consumer Code) as harmonised by the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (2005/29/EC). Crucially, it interpreted these rules in light of the 2024 reform brought about by Directive 2024/825, which amends the UCPD and the Consumer Rights Directive (2011/83/EU) to better protect consumers against deceptive environmental claims and support the green transition. The reform expands what can be considered misleading, adds a definition of “environmental claim”, and targets future-oriented climate claims — such as references to “net zero,” “carbon neutrality,” or being “in transition” — that are not underpinned by clear, objective, publicly accessible and verifiable commitments set out in a detailed, realistic implementation plan with measurable time-bound targets, allocated resources and regular independent third-party verification. The Court relied on these new standards to assess whether TotalEnergies’ consumer-facing climate messaging omitted material information or was likely to mislead the average consumer.
The parties’ claims and the Court’s analysis
Grief 1 - Carbon neutrality claim
The associations argued that TotalEnergies’ French consumer website presented an “ambition” to reach carbon neutrality by 2050 and to be “a major actor in the energy transition”, which the average consumer would understand as alignment with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C maximum global warming objective.
Applying the UCPD framework, the Court first distinguished institutional communications from consumer advertising and held that three messages on the French commercial site were advertising within the scope of consumer law. It found these claims misleading by omission because they did not disclose the company’s underlying scenario, which envisaged continued oil and gas investment, contrary to scientific pathways commonly associated with Paris alignment. Framed against the 2024 EU reform requiring clear, public, verifiable plans for future-oriented climate claims, the Court concluded that the messaging could materially distort the consumer’s decision-making and therefore constituted misleading commercial practices.
Grief 2 - Claims related to fossil gas
The associations challenged statements presenting fossil gas as “cheap,” “the least emitting” fossil fuel, an “indispensable complement” to renewables, and therefore desirable for decarbonisation.
The Court examined the cited materials and found that a number of them did not contain the incriminated wording, and that those which did were informational posts linked to institutional content without a direct nexus to the promotion, sale or supply of products to consumers. As such, they fall outside of the scope of consumer advertising rules and could not be sanctioned as misleading practices on this record. It therefore rejected this set of claims.
Grief 3 - Claims relating to agrofuels
The associations contested communications asserting that agrofuels achieve 50% and even 90% CO2 reductions compared with fossil equivalents and are therefore essential for the decarbonisation of transport.
The Court held that the four cited communications were informational posts published in 2021 in the context of the group’s rebranding, related to the group’s strategy rather than consumer promotion. They therefore did not qualify as consumer advertising practices and fell outside the material scope of the UCPD and corresponding French provisions. This set of claims was dismissed.
The Court also rejected the associations’ subsidiary claims for preventative and cessation measures based on ecological harm, finding that the requisite influence on consumer purchasing behaviour and any resulting harm to the atmosphere were not sufficiently demonstrated on the record.
The Judgment
The Court held that TotalEnergies SE and its French retail affiliate engaged in misleading commercial practices.
It ordered cessation of the identified messaging, with a one-month deadline and a provisional penalty of €10,000 per day of delay for up to 180 days.
It further ordered the publication of the decision’s operative part on the homepage of the company’s French consumer website, prominently and above the fold, for a continuous period of 180 days, under specified formatting conditions, subject to the same daily penalty in case of delay. ‘Execution provisoire’ was granted for the judgment except for the publication measure.
On remedies, the Court awarded each claimant association €8,000 in moral damages and a total of €15,000, and condemned the defendants in costs.
It dismissed all the associations’ claims relating to fossil gas and agrofuels, as well as the subsidiary claims regarding ecological harm and preventative measures.
Takeaways
This judgment is a significant development in European climate-related advertising and consumer protection litigation. The Court’s reasoning sharpens the line between institutional communications and consumer-facing advertising and confirms that future-oriented climate claims - especially those using the terms “net zero,” “neutrality” or “transition” - are scrutinised through the lens of what the average consumer understands by reference to the Paris Agreement and mainstream climate science. When climate claims omit material context such as reliance on an internal scenario permitting continued fossil expansion, that omission may render them misleading, even if framed as “ambitions.”
Additionally, the dismissal of the claims related to fossil gas and agrofuel underscores the centrality of a direct advertising nexus. As such, the judgment aligns with the evolving legislative landscape under Directive (EU) 2024/825, which revises existing frameworks to address greenwashing by clearly defining what constitutes an “environmental claim”, mandating the provision of pre-contractual information on product durability and reparability, and constraining future-oriented climate claims that lack detailed, publicly accessible, verifiable implementation plans with measurable milestones and independent verification. In other words, the judgment reflects the EU’s legislative efforts to ensure transparency and accountability in environmental advertising.
Authors: Els Empereur, Olivier Drooghmans and Hadrien Bosly
Contact us
