Claims assessment · Range claim
“Conscious collection” / “eco edit” (named green range)
Typical treatment across 5 reviewed regimes. Every verdict below is tied to a stated legal hook.
Market comparison
How this claim is typically treated
5 reviewed markets · one comparison
| Market | Typical treatment | Legal basis | What is required |
|---|---|---|---|
| European UnionEU | Restricted | View legal reasoningEmpCo Annex I; UCPD | Named-range Dictionary termSustainabilityThe capacity to maintain valued social, ecological and economic functions over time without depleting the foundations on which they depend or shifting unacceptable costs to others.Read the full definition claims need published, product-level criteria met by every item — the Norwegian CMA/H&M ruling logic: generic range claims with Higg-based scores were found misleading. |
| United KingdomUK | Restricted | View legal reasoningCMA Code (fashion guidance); ASOS/Boohoo undertaking precedent | CMA secured undertakings from ASOS/Boohoo/Asos George over green-range claims — criteria must be clear and met per item. |
| United StatesUS | Conditional | View legal reasoningFTC 260.4/.6 | Criteria disclosed; per-item compliance. |
| CanadaCA | Restricted | View legal reasoningCompetition Act s.74.01(1)(b.1) | Per-item test evidence; Bureau scrutiny of fashion. |
| AustraliaAU | Restricted | A direct source link has not yet been added for this assessment. View legal reasoningACL s.18; ACCC sweep precedent | Range criteria published and verified. |
Review your exact wording
Next, add your wording, evidence and market context for a guided review.
Review your exact wordingEvidence context
Standards and schemes relevant to this claim
These relationships are conditional. A listed standard does not automatically prove every use of the claim.