Copenhagen Fashion Week has long marketed itself as a leader in sustainability, but a new complaint is threatening to unravel that reputation.
Earlier this week, the Danish Consumer Ombudsman, which supervises marketing and consumer protection laws, began reviewing allegations that CPHFW and seven participating brands — Baum und Pferdgarten, Berner Kühl, Forza Collective, Herskind, OpéraSport, Stine Goya and Won Hundred — were making misleading sustainability claims. If taken to court, the case could have serious implications for Fashion Weeks beyond Copenhagen’s. For example, London Fashion Week modeled parts of its own sustainability framework on CPHFW’s guidelines.
The complaint, filed by anti-greenwashing expert Tanja Gotthardsen and the Danish Consumer Council, takes direct aim at the sustainability requirements CPHFW introduced for participating designers in 2020. These set minimum standards across six areas, including materials, working conditions, consumer engagement and show production. Brands are required to use at least 50% certified sustainable textiles and commit to ethical labor practices. But Gotthardsen and the Danish Consumer Council argue these guidelines lack enforcement, allow vague sustainability claims, and fail to address major environmental issues like brands’ overproduction and collection frequency. “They call them requirements, but when looking at them through the lens of actual sustainability science, a lot is missing,” c said.
She added, “There’s supposedly a screening committee, but when I looked into the brands that had been approved, I found violations of Danish greenwashing laws almost immediately,” she said. She identified seven brands with misleading sustainability claims, including vague language around organic cotton’s impact and the labeling of synthetic materials as “green.” “It made me question whether the requirements were being enforced at all,” she said.
Baum und Pferdgarten admitted to Echo, a Danish news publication, that they’ve fallen short on their pledge to eliminate virgin polyester. Berner Kühl told Danish publication Euroman that some of its marketing could have been clearer and pledged to change it. Neither brand was reachable for comment. Other brands mentioned in the complaint, including Stine Goya and OpéraSport, have been silent.
“CPHFW has promoted these brands as sustainable fashion brands,” Gotthardsen said. “That’s simply not legal under Danish consumer law. It’s misleading not just to consumers but to the industry itself.”
CPHFW CEO Cecilie Thorsmark pushed back against the allegations, saying that the organization does not market its sustainability requirements as guarantees. “I have not yet seen the complaint, but I can categorically reject that Copenhagen Fashion Week is engaging in greenwashing,” she said in a statement. “We do not control how the media chooses to describe our sustainability efforts.” Glossy reached out to Thorsmark for comment but did not get a response in time for publication.
But Gotthardsen argued that Fashion Forum, a media platform that operates under the same business registration as CPHFW, has promoted these requirements extensively, effectively using them as a marketing tool. “They’re now trying to distance themselves from that, but the fact remains that the requirements have been used as a promotional asset for years,” Gotthardsen said.
If the complaint is upheld, CPHFW and the implicated brands could face fines under the E.U.’s Green Claims Directive, which allows regulators to impose penalties of up to 4% of annual turnover per violation.
The impact could extend well beyond Denmark. CPHFW’s sustainability guidelines have influenced those of other major fashion weeks, including Berlin and London. If Danish regulators determine these guidelines don’t hold up legally, fashion weeks elsewhere may need to rethink their own sustainability claims before consumer watchdogs start knocking. And Copenhagen Fashion Week may face more than just fines. Its sustainability requirements could be reworked or revoked, brand participation and sponsorships could be at risk, and its reputation as a sustainability leader could take a major hit, forcing a fundamental overhaul of its framework.
Gotthardsen is no stranger to this kind of fight. In 2021, she was part of a case against Zalando, where the e-commerce giant was accused of misleading consumers with vague green labels. At the time, Zalando placed a sustainability flag on more than 25,000 products, many of which contained just 20% recycled material — often PET bottle-based polyester, which is not a true circular solution. Recycled materials typically qualify only if 50% or more of the total material content. The case took three years to resolve, but, ultimately, Zalando was forced to remove all of its misleading green labels. “That was a wake-up call for e-commerce, and this could be the same for fashion weeks,” Gotthardsen said. “Authorities are getting more aggressive. We’re no longer in an era where brands can throw around sustainability claims without serious consequences.”
The Danish Consumer Ombudsman said last year in a public statement that it will crack down on greenwashing in fashion and beauty later this year. That could spell trouble for brands that aren’t airtight in how they communicate sustainability. The Danish Consumer Ombudsman could not be reached for comment.
“The industry needs to stop treating sustainability as a branding exercise,” said Gotthardsen. “If this case proves anything, it’s that consumers and regulators are no longer willing to take vague commitments at face value.”
