Background
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 the ASA’s assessment of the ad that formed the subject of this ruling was carried out before 7 April 2025 the ASA considered the ad 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.
This Ruling forms part of a wider piece of work on ads making compostable claims, identified for investigation following intelligence gathered by the ASA. See also related rulings published on 30 April.
Ad description
A paid-for search ad for Lavazza Eco Caps coffee pods, seen on 7 June 2024, stated “Lavazza [...] New Eco Caps”. Further text below stated “Lavazza A Modo Mio Eco Caps: the coffee shop taste in compostable capsules for your home. Good as usual, feels even better! The taste of Lavazza Coffee in a Compostable Capsule [...] Your Espresso at Home".
Issue
The ASA challenged whether the claim “compostable capsules” was misleading.
Response
Lavazza Coffee (UK) Ltd said “compostable” would be understood as meaning that a product was made of compostable material, and not necessarily that it was compostable within a domestic compost. It was not their intention for consumers to understand the ad as suggesting the capsules were home compostable. The capsules were certified for industrial composting, and that was stated on their website.
Assessment
Upheld
CAP guidance stated that if the disposal process referred to in an ad was likely to differ from the average consumer's expectation of what that process entailed, that may be considered material information, and the claim was likely to need qualification – for example, by making clear where and how the product should be disposed of. It referred to where compostable products are only suitable for industrial composting, such as when effective degradation would not occur in home composting, as an example of information that may be material to a consumer's transactional decision. Claims that do not clearly and prominently include this information were less likely to comply. The ASA assessed the ad in question against the CAP Code.
We considered consumers would understand the claim “compostable capsules”, in the context of an ad for a consumer product for use in the home, to mean that the capsules were compostable and that they could be composted at home.
We understood the capsules had been certified to the European Standard EN13432. A product certified to meet that standard was designed to breakdown within an industrial compost. It would therefore not necessarily breakdown within a domestic compost, as the composts differed in composition – for example, in temperature. Also, a product may take longer to breakdown fully in a domestic compost, if at all, and toxic matter may remain. We further understood that compostable plastics should not be placed within plastic recycling collections as they could contaminate plastic recycling streams. Additionally, not all local Councils were able to place industrially compostable plastics, such as when collected with food or garden waste, within an industrial compost and some Councils recommended compostable plastics be placed in a waste bin.
The claim “compostable capsules” implied the capsules, which would typically be used within the home, could be composted in a home composter, but as they were not intended to be placed there, we considered the claim was likely to mislead. We considered, within the context of an ad that referred to an industrially compostable product as “compostable”, making clear their intended disposal location, such that it was clear they were not home compostable, and where consumers could find further information about how they could access the intended location, was material information that should have been made clear in the search ad, notwithstanding any space limitations. In any event, we considered the ad was not limited by time or space to such an extent that the information could not be provided. The ad had a character limit of 270, Lavazza had used 252. There was, therefore, sufficient space within the ad format to correctly inform about the nature of the product and how it should be disposed.
Additionally, the ad linked through to a page that listed the different varieties of coffee capsules Lavazza sold, but information about the capsules’ disposal was not referenced there. We acknowledged that other pages of Lavazza’s website did make clear the capsules’ intended disposal location, such as within the “Recycling” section of their “Frequently Asked Questions” page, and the page headed “Lavazza A Modo Mio”, which offered further information about that range. However, as consumers would not necessarily visit those separate pages as part of their purchase journey, the appearance of the information at those locations was not adequate to explain the intended disposal location for the capsules and how consumers could access it. The individual product listing pages for the different varieties of Eco Caps, which could be accessed via the page the ad linked through to, referred to the fact that they were industrially compostable, in that they showed an image of the product’s packaging which contained text that stated "COMPOSTABLE CAPSULES CERTIFIED EN13432:2002”. However, the reference was too detached from the initial compostable capsules claim and, in any event, it was unlikely to convey to consumers that the capsules were not home compostable.
The ad suggested the capsules could be composted in a location that they were not designed for, and did not make clear how consumers should dispose of the product correctly in order to have the claimed effect, which we considered was material information that should have been included in the ad. We concluded the ad was therefore likely to mislead.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 11.1, and 11.2 (Environmental claims).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form investigated. We told Lavazza Coffee (UK) Ltd to ensure their search ads did not mislead over the correct route for disposal when making composting claims or omit material information about the disposal of compostable products.
