The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2025
Lacoste and Superdry called their clothes 'sustainable' — the ASA said prove it
Lacoste promoted kids' clothes as 'sustainable clothing' and Superdry promised 'style and sustainability.' The ASA banned both for lacking evidence.
Lacoste · Superdry
What happened
On December 3, 2025, the UK's ASA banned Google ads from Lacoste and Superdry — alongside a Nike ad — for making unsubstantiated sustainability claims. Superdry's ad promoted 'a wardrobe that combines style and sustainability.' Lacoste's ad called its kids' range 'sustainable clothing.'
Superdry defended the claim, arguing customers would understand it to mean clothes were either stylish, sustainable, or both — not that all products were sustainable. The ASA ruled the claim would lead customers to believe all Superdry products were sustainable, and the brand failed to provide evidence that its products had no detrimental environmental impact.
Lacoste told the ASA it had worked for years to reduce its carbon footprint. The ASA acknowledged the reduction but ruled that Lacoste failed to offer evidence that its clothing had 'no detrimental effect on the environment.' The ruling set a standard: 'sustainable' is a claim that requires proof of zero detriment — not just improvement.
Why it happened
- The word 'sustainable' is an absolute claim: the ASA ruled it means 'no detrimental effect' — not 'less detrimental than before' — and brands cannot use it without evidence.
- The defence confirmed the gap: Superdry argued customers would not take the claim literally — which is an admission that the word is not meant to be believed.
- The Google ad format offered no context: a paid search ad with three words has no room for substantiation — the claim stands alone and must stand alone.
- The standard is now structural: the ASA told all three brands that future sustainability claims require a 'high level of substantiation' — the era of vague green language in ad copy is over.
The lesson
'Sustainable' is not a vibe — it is a verifiable claim. If your evidence is 'we reduced our carbon footprint,' say that. If your evidence is nothing, say nothing.
Sources
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Jaded London's holiday email glamorised smoking — the ASA banned it
Next's legging ad angled the camera low enough that the ASA called the model too thin
M&S said a model's pose was 'confidence' — the ASA read prominent collarbones instead
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →
Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.