A deceptive or inaccurate packaging label confuses consumers about the
product’s ingredients, qualities, benefits, and other critical
information. Thus, consumer protection laws and regulations exist that
prohibit businesses from giving a false impression, either intentionally
or unintentionally.

Failure to adhere to the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA) and
other similar laws and regulations can expose consumers to health risks
and lead to legal issues and hefty fines for manufacturers and sellers.

Here are some of the most high-profile packaging label lawsuits that
involved big corporations. Some of these cases had been dismissed due to
lack of grounds, while others were resolved through settlement.

1. Subway’s “100% Tuna” Lawsuit

In January 2021, a Californian customer filed a lawsuit against
fast-food giant Subway, claiming that its tuna products contained
ingredients other than tuna. The plaintiff, Nilima Amin, claimed to
have ordered Subway tuna products more than 100 times before filing
a lawsuit against the fast-food giant.

But after six months of litigation, a California-based judge
dismissed the case after Amin ended the lawsuit, claiming that her
difficult pregnancy left her unable to pursue the case.

Moreover, the judge rejected the plaintiff’s insistence that tuna was
the only acceptable ingredient, arguing that other ingredients such as
mayonnaise were okay and a “fact of life.”

Subway representatives said the lawsuit and the plaintiff’s claims
resulted in the spread of harmful information, causing damage to the
brand and its franchisees.

2. Kind Bars vs. FDA

In March 2015, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) issued a
warning letter to snack company KIND, saying some of its bars — like
the Fruit & Nut Almond & Apricot bar and the Fruit & Nut Almond &
Coconut — should remove the term “healthy” from its website and
product packaging.

Snack foods labeled with “healthy” cannot have more than 3 grams of
total fat or 1 gram of saturated fat per serving, according to the
FDA regulations. However, KIND argued that although the fat content
of its products exceeded the current rules, it came from nuts and
thus considered healthy.

About a year after receiving the FDA warning, KIND was allowed to use
the term “healthy” again on its products. But there is one caveat: The
snack company can only use the term provided that it’s “presented as its
corporate philosophy” and not as a nutrition claim.

3. Vanilla & Honey Fraud Cases

Many food brands use the terms “real vanilla” or “pure honey” despite
using cheaper artificial substitutes, leading to class-action lawsuits.
For example, Whole Foods Market Inc. was sued in 2021 for allegedly
tricking consumers into thinking the vanilla in its “365 Vanilla
Almondmilk” came mainly from vanilla beans.

However, a judge from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California dismissed the class action lawsuit, explaining that the
challenged label did not contain any other words or image that could
have suggested that the flavor was derived exclusively from vanilla
beans.

Honey Bunches of Oats also faced a similar legal woe. In 2019,
plaintiffs claimed the company’s cereal products had misleading and
deceptive labeling and marketing. They also mentioned the branding
and packaging that included a wooden honey dipper dripping with
honey.

However, a Massachusetts federal court dismissed the lawsuit against
the food company, explaining that the packaging contained an
accurate ingredient list and thus no reasonable consumer would be
misled about the honey content of the cereal.

The federal court also argued that the cereals’ packaging labels
made no claims about the “objective and measurable quantity of
honey.”

4. Welch’s Fruit Snacks Misleading Labeling

Welch’s Fruit Snacks have been the subject of multiple class action
lawsuits alleging the company of using misleading labels. For
instance, a group of plaintiffs filed a case in September 2015
arguing that the snacks contained mostly a combination of corn
syrup, sugar, modified corn starch, dyes, juice from concentrate,
and artificial flavors. They also argued that “these are no more
healthful than candy.”

U.S. Magistrate Judge Vera M. Scanlon also said the Fruit Snacks
packaging is more deceptive than the packaging in Gerber fruit juice
snacks.

As part of a class action settlement, the company paid $1.5 million and
altered the labels on some of its fruit snacks and the information on
its website.

5. Red Bull’s “It Gives You Wings” Settlement

Red Bull settled two class action lawsuits and agreed to pay $13
million to US customers. The terms of the settlement allowed
customers who purchased Red Bull products between Jan. 1, 2002 and
Oct. 3, 2014 to receive a cash payment worth $10, or $15 worth of
Red Bull products.

The plaintiffs argued that they were misled by the company’s
exaggerated claims about the benefits of drinking Red Bull,
particularly the slogan “Red Bull gives you wings.”

Conclusion

Proper labeling protects businesses from expensive litigations and hefty
legal fines and prevents confusion and potential harm to consumers. In
addition, it shows a company’ s commitment to the safety and health of
people.

Clear, easy-to-understand, and accurate labeling also builds consumer
trust, which is the key to brand loyalty and repeat business.

If you don’t know how to create an effective label for your product,
check out
UPrinting’s beginner’s guide
that also explains the key parts of a label, the different types of
labels (legal information, back label, and front label), and among
others.