Italian Competition Authority Ruling Eni’s Diesel+ Advertising Campaign

On December 20, 2019, the Italian Competition Authority (AGCM) imposed a five million euro fine—the maximum allowable penalty—on ENI, a major Italian oil and gas company, for engaging in "unfair commercial practices regarding environmental claims." The AGCM found that ENI’s advertising for its Diesel+ fuel misled consumers by associating the product with “green” attributes that were not fully representative of the fuel’s environmental impact. Specifically, the AGCM held that environmental claims in advertising should (i) clearly and accurately reflect the product's environmental benefits, (ii) be supported by scientific evidence, and (iii) be conveyed without misleading omissions. ENI’s Diesel+ advertising campaign prominently used a “green” logo alongside the product name, which, according to the AGCM, implied that the environmental benefits applied to the fuel as a whole, when in reality, they were limited to only one component. The Authority determined that this campaign spread “false and omissive information” about Diesel+’s environmental impact, creating a misleading impression of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, the AGCM concluded that ENI’s campaign constituted an “unfair commercial practice” in violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Italian Consumer Code, which protect consumers from misleading advertising. ENI appealed the decision to the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio, which upheld the AGCM's ruling. However, on April 23, 2024, Italy's highest administrative court, the Consiglio di Stato, overturned this decision in ENI’s favor. The Consiglio di Stato found that ENI’s advertising did not constitute an unfair commercial practice and ruled the AGCM’s claims unfounded. The court emphasized that “green” claims could be applied to products like diesel fuel, which, despite remaining polluting, could offer relatively lower environmental impacts compared to other products. The court noted that such claims were permissible provided they included “supporting claims”—additional messages or visuals clarifying the product’s limited environmental benefits. This ruling thus established that, within Italy’s regulatory framework, the use of green claims was acceptable for inherently polluting products, provided the claims were contextualized and not misleading in their presentation.