Quebec

Canada

British Columbia

Yukon

Nunavut

Nova Scotia

Prince Edward Island

Alberta

Saskatchewan

Newfoundland and Labrador

Manitoba

Ontario

Northwest Territories

New Brunswick

The plaintiff alleges that Procter & Gamble’s “Keep Forests as Forests” campaign, including “Protect-Grow-Restore” messaging, misrepresents the environmental footprint of Charmin toilet paper. Despite marketing the product as environmentally friendly, the suit claims that the paper is produced using widespread deforestation practices. This action is part of a growing wave of Canadian private and class claims targeting greenwashing in consumer products following the 2024–2025 amendments to the Competition Act, which enabled private parties to challenge misleading environmental claims. The case is relevant to climate change as it contests corporate claims about forest protection, sustainability, and environmental responsibility.

In December 2024, a proposed consumer class action was filed before the Superior Court of Quebec against 9199-4467 Québec Inc., doing business as Earth Rated, alleging false and misleading environmental representations in violation of the Competition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-34, and related consumer protection legislation  ￼. The plaintiff, acting on behalf of purchasers across Canada or, alternatively, a Quebec subclass, claims that Earth Rated’s “Certified Compostable Poop Bags” were marketed, labelled, and sold as compostable in circumstances where, in practice, the bags and their intended contents (pet waste) cannot be composted in most municipal composting systems in Canada. According to the application, composting facilities in Quebec and many other provinces either do not accept compostable plastics at all, do not accept pet waste, or mechanically remove and landfill plastic bags during processing, rendering compostability claims ineffective or misleading in real-world disposal conditions.

The plaintiff alleges that Earth Rated leveraged consumer concern about environmental impacts to charge a price premium for these products, notwithstanding the limited availability of composting infrastructure capable of processing them as advertised. The application relies on federal guidance on environmental claims, international standards on environmental labelling, and amendments to section 74.01 of the Competition Act that specifically address representations about environmental benefits and climate change mitigation, including requirements that such claims be supported by adequate and proper testing or substantiation. The relief sought includes authorization of a class action, compensatory and punitive damages, declaratory relief, and an injunction prohibiting continued representation of the products as compostable.

In April 2025, Earth Rated filed an application seeking authorization to adduce additional evidence at the authorization stage under the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure  ￼. The defendant argues that the proposed sworn statement and supporting exhibits correct or clarify what it characterizes as incomplete or inaccurate allegations in the authorization application. In particular, Earth Rated asserts that certain composting facilities in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada do accept certified compostable bags, with or without pet waste, and that the full product packaging contains qualifying language indicating that compostability depends on the availability and acceptance policies of local municipal programs. The defendant submits that this evidence is relevant to assessing whether the plaintiff has established an arguable case, including whether the impugned representations would mislead a reasonable consumer when read in context.

The case forms part of a broader trend in Canada since 2024 toward increased private enforcement and litigation concerning environmental and climate-related marketing claims. Amendments to the Competition Act expanding private access and explicitly addressing claims related to environmental protection and climate change mitigation have coincided with heightened scrutiny of corporate representations concerning compostability, recyclability, offsets, and emissions reductions. While framed as consumer and competition litigation, the proceedings are climate-relevant insofar as they test the legal standards governing claims about environmentally beneficial products and the evidentiary threshold for substantiating such claims in light of existing waste management and emissions-reduction realities.

ENvironnement JEUnesse, an environmental nonprofit, has applied in the Superior Court of Québec to bring a climate change-related class action against the Canadian government on behalf of Québec citizens aged 35 and under. ENvironnement JEUnesse reports that it has asked the Court, inter alia, to declare that the Government of Canada has failed in its obligations to protect the fundamental rights of young people under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Québec Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The organization alleges that the government violated plaintiffs’ rights by setting a greenhouse gas reduction target insufficient to avoid dangerous climate change impacts and by lacking an adequate plan to reach its greenhouse gas emission target. 

More specifically, plaintiffs allege that 1) the “Canadian government's adoption of GHG emission targets that it knows are harmful to human life and health violates the right of class members to life, inviolability and security protected by section 7 of the Canadian Charter and section 1 of the Québec Charter,” and 2) “by adopting inadequate targets and failing to put in place the necessary measures to achieve these targets, the government is violating the class members' right to live in a healthful environment in which biodiversity is preserved, protected by the Québec Charter.” 

The class action seeks a declaratory judgment and punitive damages. They have also asked the court to order a cessation of interference with plaintiffs’ rights.

On July 11, 2019, the court dismissed the motion for authorization to institute a class action. The judge concluded that the impact of climate change on human rights is a justiciable issue and that the Canadian Charters and Quebec rights and freedoms can apply to government actions in this area. However, the judge declined to authorize the proposed class, determining that the 35-year age cut-off was arbitrary and not objective. Environment JEUnesse appealed the decision on August 16.

On December 13th, 2021, the Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on justiciability and denied the certification of the proposed climate change class action suit. The Court found that “all the alleged facts” accuse the Canadian government of a “fault of omission” resulting from its inaction in the face of global warming. Conclusions sought by the Appellants are tantamount to asking the courts to tell the legislature what to do, which is not their role. It held that deference to the legislative power is “necessary” as it is better placed to weigh the countless challenges of global warming. The Court did not weigh in on the allegation that government actions were contributing to climate change and therefore violated the Charter rights. The Court also objected to the lack of specificity of the remedy requested and agreed with the trial judge that the proposed class was arbitrary since the theory of the case on age discrimination was not acceptable. 

ENvironnement Jeunesse filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada on February 11, 2022. On July 28, 2022, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the application.

Geography

Quebec

Recent cases