In This Article:
Lululemon has secured a win in a lawsuit that alleged it used greenwashing to deceive consumers.
The Canadian athleisure brand has staved off a class-action lawsuit from a group of plaintiffs throughout the U.S. who alleged it “has taken advantage of…consumers and their trust through a massive, global ‘greenwashing’ campaign.”
More from Sourcing Journal
Amandeep Gyani filed the original complaint in a Florida court last year, and a group of additional plaintiffs co-filed an amended complaint alongside Gyani in September 2024. Effectively, the group argued that they had been financially harmed by Lululemon’s marketing activities, specifically pertaining to the company’s “Be Planet” campaign.
But Lululemon clapped back, asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit on a number of grounds, including lack of jurisdiction in the matter and the company’s opinion that the plaintiffs had failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove that Lululemon’s statements and sustainability goals cause direct injury.
“Not one of the plaintiffs pleads: which of Lululemon’s statements, if any, they saw; when they purportedly saw the statements; when they purportedly purchased Lululemon products as a result of the statements or which Lululemon products they purportedly purchased,” counsel for Lululemon wrote in the motion to dismiss, filed just two weeks after plaintiffs filed their amended complaint.
Throughout the plaintiffs’ complaint, they note that some consumers choose to “pay the exorbitant premiums” because they believe that, in doing so, they are purchasing products that are an environmentally friendly choice.
But in its motion to dismiss, Lululemon notes that the plaintiffs do not make claims about the quality of the products they allegedly purchased from the company.
“Plaintiffs do not allege that they did not receive the goods they purchased from Lululemon, or that those goods were defective. Instead, Plaintiffs contend that if they had known the proverbial ‘truth’ about Lululemon’s environmental efforts, they would not have purchased those products at such a premium,” the company wrote.
It stacked the motion high with legal precedent to show that, in other cases, consumers bringing action against companies saw cases dismissed for the same reason.
Judge Beth Bloom agreed with the company in a Wednesday decision, noting that “plaintiffs fail to allege that Lululemon’s products were defective or worthless,” and without the causation connection, the plaintiffs could not sufficiently argue their case.