Gastronomy has to take reusable offers seriously: court ruling in Berlin

Veröffentlicht:

Von:

Erfahren Sie in unserem Artikel, warum Gastronomieunternehmen gesetzlich verpflichtet sind, stets ausreichend Mehrwegverpackungen anzubieten. Das Landgericht Berlin stellt klar: Die Einhaltung der Mehrwegangebotspflicht ist entscheidend für den Klimaschutz und die Reduktion von Einwegmüll. Lesen Sie mehr über das Urteil der Deutschen Umwelthilfe und die Bedeutung von Mehrweggeschirr für unsere Umwelt.
In our article, find out why restaurants are legally obliged to always offer sufficient reusable packaging. The Berlin Regional Court clarifies: Compliance with the reusable obligation is crucial for climate protection and reducing disposable waste. Read more about the judgment of German environmental aid and the importance of reusable dishes for our environment. (Symbolbild/MB)

obligation to reusable: a profit for environmental protection in gastronomy

In a pioneering judgment, the district court of Berlin decided that catering companies that are subject to the reusable obligation must have sufficient reusable packaging at any time. This judgment follows a lawsuit by German Environmental Aid (DUH) against a franchisee from Back-Factory. The aim of the reusable obligation is to reduce the mass consumption of disposable products and thus to promote climate and resource protection (file number 91 O 41/24).

The decision of the court is an important step towards environmental protection. Barbara Metz, the federal manager of the DUH, commented: " The judgment is a success for consumers and an important signal to all restaurants and food retailers, to take the reusable offer seriously and to implement them consistently. " for a comprehensive application.

The motivation behind this legal regulation makes it clear by the alarming numbers: in Germany there is a shocking amount of 5.8 billion disposable cups and 4.5 billion one-way eating boxes every year. These figures make it clear that sporadic provision of reusable products is not sufficient; The responsibility lies with the company to always offer a sufficient amount of reusable packaging, especially since disposable dishes are always available.

Another critical point that Metz emphasizes is the insufficient control by the responsible state authorities. It describes the current situation as a "poverty certificate" and calls for an urgently required improvement in the controls to ensure compliance with the reusable duty. This is of central importance to actively promote sustainable use of resources and environmental protection.

Overall, this judgment is not only a victory for environmental protection, but also a sign for all restaurants that have to take responsibility for the ecological footprint of their business. The pressure on the companies will increase to ensure that they meet the legal requirements and actively contribute to reducing waste.