217
Fashion Jobs
SHIMANO
Brand Coordinator
Permanent · UPPSALA
L'OREAL GROUP
Pharmacy Representative - Dermatological Beauty Division - Gothenburg Region
Permanent ·
GANT
Business Controller
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
GANT
Senior Business Controller
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
H&M
Operations Manager to h&m Distribution Center Borås
Permanent · BORÅS
H&M
Web Analyst / qa Data Layer Resource
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
H&M
Data Analyst to h&m – Supply Planning
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
H&M
Engineering Manager Sap Platforms, Sap Dev & Tech
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
H&M
Wifi Solution Architect - Network
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
H&M
Cyber Security Iam Manager
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
NAKD
Head of Sales
Permanent · GOTHENBURG
NAKD
Head of Commercial Business Control
Permanent · GOTHENBURG
H&M
Pension & Benefits Administrator And Process Improver
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
H&M
Technical Engineer For Warehouse Devices Management
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
H&M
Junior Planner to h&m Assortment- Open Application
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
RALPH LAUREN
Sales Professional
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
H&M
Advanced User Team Leader
Permanent · ESKILSTUNA
ZALANDO
Principal Product Manager - Data And Platform (All Genders)
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
ESSILORLUXOTTICA GROUP
Key Account Manager Nordics
Permanent · GOTHENBURG
H&M
Production Manager – Singular Society
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
ZALANDO
Senior Product Manager - Finance & Compliance (All Genders)
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
ZALANDO
Senior Product Manager - Returns Shipping Solutions
Permanent · STOCKHOLM
Ads
By
Reuters API
Published
Sep 27, 2022
Reading time
2 minutes
Download
Download the article
Print
Text size

L'Oreal to face lawsuit over wrinkle-smoothing collagen claims

By
Reuters API
Published
Sep 27, 2022

L'Oreal SA on Tuesday failed to persuade a U.S. judge in Manhattan to dismiss a proposed class action lawsuit accusing the company of defrauding shoppers by suggesting that two topical collagen products help smooth wrinkles.


Reuters



The plaintiffs Rocio Lopez and Rachel Lumbra sued in August 2021, claiming that L'Oreal violated New York and California consumer protection laws by deceiving them into overpaying for its Collagen Moisture Filler Day/Night Cream and its Fragrance-Free Collagen Moisture Filler Daily Moisturizer.

According to the complaint, topically applied collagen is too large to be absorbed by the epidermis, the uppermost layer of skin, making the products incapable of helping "smooth wrinkles" and "restore skin's cushion" as the labels suggest.

L'Oreal sought a dismissal, claiming it did not say a moisturizer containing collagen would penetrate the skin or stimulate collagen production, and that reasonable consumers would not believe otherwise from the products' names.

But U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter said the plaintiffs plausibly alleged that the "collagen" on L'Oreal's labels referred to molecules that provide cosmetic benefits, by purporting to reverse signs of aging.

"It is wholly plausible that a reasonable consumer, shopping for cosmetics, saw a product named 'Collagen Moisture Filler,' promising to 'smooth wrinkles' and 'restore skin's cushion,' and associated this product with the cosmetic benefits of the collagen molecule," the judge wrote.

L'Oreal and its lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A lawyer for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to similar requests.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for purchasers of the L'Oreal products nationwide.

The case is Lopez et al v L'Oreal USA Inc, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 21-07300.
 

© Thomson Reuters 2024 All rights reserved.