Background
This Ruling forms part of a wider piece of work on environmental claims. These ads were identified for investigation following a complaint received, and intelligence gathering by our Active Ad Monitoring system. See also related rulings published on 3 September.
On 7 April 2025, the Advertising Codes were updated to reflect the revocation and restatement of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs – the legislation from which the majority of the CAP and BCAP rules on misleading advertising derived) by the Unfair Commercial Practices provisions in the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA). On that date, the wording of a number of the rules in the Advertising Codes was changed to reflect relevant changes introduced by the DMCCA on 6 April 2025.
Given that the complaint that formed the subject of this ruling was received before 7 April 2025, the ASA considered the ads and complaints under the wording of the rules that existed prior to 7 April 2025, and the Ruling (and references to rules within it) should therefore be read in line with this wording, available here – CAP Code and BCAP Code.
Summary of Council decision:
Two Issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A website, www.cruisecircle.co.uk, for cruise travel agent Cruise Circle seen on 20 March 2025, included a page that focused on cruise operator MSC Cruises. A photo at the top of the page showed the MSC Euribia cruise ship and featured a caption that stated “German artist […] won a competition to design the hull artwork, entitled #SaveTheSea”. The hull artwork comprised abstract imagery of marine life – including turtles, fish, an octopus and a whale. Text below that included the claims “showcasing the line’s commitment to environmental responsibility” and “Eco-Friendly LNG Technology. MSC Euribia is a testament to MSC Cruises’ commitment to sustainability. Powered by LNG, the cleanest marine fuel […]”.
Issue
Opportunity Green challenged whether the following claims were misleading:
- Eco-Friendly LNG Technology
- LNG, the world’s cleanest marine fuel
Response
1. & 2. Travel Circle Ltd t/a Cruise Circle said their website content came from a third party, and that they could not monitor all content provided by third party feeds. They removed the claims from their website.
MSC Cruise S.A. t/a MSC Cruises said they had no control over the form of wording used by travel agents in, among other places, their advertising. They had previously provided wording to Cruise Circle via a press release, and had also submitted wording to a digital platform from which travel agents could take information to use in promotional materials. They said the wording in the ad had not been supplied by them. Some wording similar to that challenged under Issue 1 had been provided in a press release in 2023, though the wording used in the ad omitted some of the contextual detail present in the press release.
Assessment
1. & 2. Upheld
The CAP Code required that the basis of environmental claims, and comparative claims such as “greener”, must be clear, and that absolute environmental claims must be supported by a high level of substantiation. Environmental claims must be based on the full life cycle of the advertised product, unless the ad stated otherwise.
The ASA considered consumers would understand the claim “Eco-Friendly LNG technology”, in the context of the ad, which mentioned MSC Cruises’ commitment to environmental responsibility and sustainability, and included an image of a cruise ship with artwork titled “#SaveTheSea”, as an absolute claim that the technology used to power the relevant cruise ship would not be harmful to the environment at any point in its life cycle. We therefore expected to see a high level of substantiation demonstrating that absolute claim. Consumers would further understand the claim “LNG, the world’s cleanest marine fuel” as meaning liquefied natural gas (LNG) was the least-polluting marine fuel. We considered the claim would be understood as a comparison against all marine fuels used in the cruise sector globally.
The basis of neither claim was stated. We understood LNG was a fossil fuel that primarily comprised methane. It produced carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions when burned, such as sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxide. Its production and use had other potentially negative environmental impacts, such as methane slip and leakage, which was the emission of unburned methane into the atmosphere, at all stages of the fuel’s life cycle, from production through to burning. While LNG might have produced lower levels of CO2 emissions than conventional diesel when burned, the production and use of LNG would still result in the release of that gas into the atmosphere throughout its life cycle, which was making a substantial contribution to climate change. It was, therefore, unacceptable to make an absolute claim, such as “Eco-friendly” on the basis of its use. In addition, evidence was not held to demonstrate that LNG was the least-polluting marine fuel globally.
For those reasons, we therefore concluded the ad was likely to mislead.
On those points, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.33 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors), 11.1, 11.3, and 11.4 (Environmental claims).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Travel Circle Ltd t/a Cruise Circle to ensure the basis of future environmental claims, and comparative claims, was made clear. Unless an ad clarified otherwise, they must hold robust substantiation relating to the full life cycle of a cruise to support an environmental claim.
