Claims assessment · Range claim
Conscious collection” / “eco edit” (named green range)
Typical treatment across five regimes. Every verdict below is tied to a stated legal hook.
Market comparison
How this claim is typically treated
Five major markets · one reviewed comparison
| Market | Typical treatment | Legal basis | What is required |
|---|---|---|---|
| European UnionEU | Restricted | View legal reasoningEmpCo Annex I; UCPD | Named-range sustainability 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 | The cited source is recorded in the assessment. View legal reasoningACL s.18; ACCC sweep precedent | Range criteria published and verified. |