{"id":80651,"date":"2023-05-23T11:55:18","date_gmt":"2023-05-23T09:55:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/packaging-journal.de\/?p=80651"},"modified":"2023-05-23T13:58:01","modified_gmt":"2023-05-23T11:58:01","slug":"lidl-duh-legal-dispute-false-statement","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/packaging-journal.de\/en\/lidl-duh-rechtsstreit-falschaussage\/","title":{"rendered":"Legal dispute between Lidl and German Environmental Aid"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Deutsche Umwelthilfe is taking legal action against Lidl's accusation of false allegations. The injunction claims made by Lidl are grammatical quibbles that do not alter the criticism levelled by DUH. On 17 May, the discounter had warned DUH about two grammatical subtleties.<\/strong>
<\/strong><\/p>

Just a few weeks ago, it was almost impossible to walk from A to B or surf the net in Germany, without being surprised by G\u00fcnther Jauch<\/strong>. The presenter is the advertising face of a Marketing campaign of the Lidl supermarket group<\/a>, in which the advantages of the chain's so-called \u201ecirculation bottle\u201c were emphasised.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Lidl\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
G\u00fcnther Jauch is the face of the Lidl campaign for the \"Kreislaufflasche\". (Image: Lidl)<\/figcaption>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

The German Environmental Aid Association (DUH), among others, took offence at some points. Shortly after the campaign started, the DUH criticised in a press release on 26 April<\/a> among other things, that the study on which the campaign is based \u201ecompares apples with pears\u201c, as the specific product \u201ereusable bottle\u201c was compared with general, ten-year-old average values for reusable bottles. From DUH's point of view, a best practice example in the single-use sector should be compared with a corresponding best practice example in the reusable sector.<\/strong> The environmental and consumer protection organisation also pointed out that the Lidl recycling system cannot be transferred to all other single-use bottle systems.<\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div><\/div>

On 3 May, Lidl again responded to the allegations with a press release and accused the DUH of spreading false claims.<\/strong> The association has now reaffirmed all previous criticisms of Lidl's single-use plastic bottles as factually correct and responded on 16 May with a request to Lidl to issue a cease-and-desist declaration<\/strong>.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

\"Bordering on denial of reality\"<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Barbara Metz, Federal Managing Director of DUH: \u201eLidl's response to our fact check is increasingly thin-skinned. We even see our criticism of Lidl's single-use plastic bottles confirmed by the publications presented by the discounter. Lidl has demonstrably not compared itself with top performers in the reusable sector with its specific disposable bottles. Average reusable data up to ten years old was used to evaluate the special Lidl disposable system.<\/strong> Furthermore, the use of 100 per cent recycled material advertised by Lidl in the German market cannot be achieved for all market participants due to the system, because up to five per cent of the material can be lost during recycling processes. The fact that Lidl criticises these facts as false claims borders on a denial of reality. After all, these are the results of a life cycle assessment that the discounter itself commissioned from the Ifeu Institute. We welcome the opportunity to substantiate our criticism of Lidl's single-use plastic lobbying as part of the legal dispute we have initiated<\/strong>.\"<\/p>