Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database

ASA complaint on cruise travel agents by Opportunity Green

Geography
Year
2024
Document Type
Litigation

About this case

Filing year
2024
Status
Decided
Court/admin entity
United KingdomAdvertising Standards Authority (ASA)
Case category
Suits against corporations, individualsCorporationsMisleading advertising
Principal law
United KingdomCode of Non-broadcast AdvertisingUnited KingdomSales Promotion and Direct Marketing
At issue
Whether cruise industry advertising of LNG as a "clean" or "eco-friendly" fuel is misleading.

Documents

Filing Date
Document
Type
09/03/2025
ASA Ruling on www.Cruise.co.uk Ltd t/a SeaScanner
Decision
09/03/2025
ASA Ruling on TravelCircle Ltd t/a Cruise Circle
Decision

Summary

On 3 September 2025, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) upheld two complaints by climate change NGO Opportunity Green concerning environmental claims made by cruise travel agents Seascanner and Cruise Circle, about liquified natural gas (fossil LNG). The adverts touted environmental claims about MSC Cruises’ LNG-powered ships: MSC World Europa and MSC Euribia. References were made to the ships being “eco-friendly” and fossil LNG being “the world’s cleanest marine fuel”. The ASA found that the adverts breached several provisions of the UK non-broadcast advertising code (CAP code) and were likely to mislead. In reaching its decision on Seascanner, the ASA explained that LNG was a fossil fuel that primarily comprised methane. The ruling stated that whilst fossil LNG produces lower levels of CO2, sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxide than traditional marine fuel, its production and use had other potentially negative environmental impacts. In particular, methane slip and leakage, which is the emission of unburned methane into the atmosphere, at all stages of the fuel’s life cycle, make a substantial contribution to climate change. The ASA added that fossil LNG produces reduced, but still significant, CO2 emissions over its full lifecycle, which was not explained in the ad. The ruling on Seascanner also highlighted other environmental impacts of cruising that could harm marine life and ecosystems, such as water discharges. As the advert had not given information to put the impact of LNG or ‘environmental technology’ into context, the ASA concluded that the environmental impact of the advertised cruise ship had not been adequately explained. Similar findings on the lifecycle impacts of fossil LNG were made in the ruling on Cruise Circle, making it unacceptable to make an absolute claim such as “eco-friendly”. The ASA also stated that evidence did not demonstrate that LNG was the least-polluting marine fuel globally. It said that advertisers must robustly substantiate the full lifecycle emissions of a cruise to support an environmental claim.