If 2025 showed where pressure is building fastest in beauty and personal care, it was not only in regulation or trade—but in the courtroom. Across jurisdictions, litigation surged as regulators, competitors, consumers and investors increasingly turned to legal action to resolve disputes over data, safety, marketing claims and market power. For the industry, the year underscored a clear reality: legal risk is now a core operational concern.
In the US, privacy, competition and product safety dominated the docket. A San Francisco appeals court cleared the way for a class action against Shopify, accused of collecting personal data from shoppers on third-party retail sites—raising broader questions about consent and data flows in e-commerce. Meta, meanwhile, prepared to stand trial in a landmark antitrust case brought by the Federal Trade Commission, seeking to unwind its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, a case with far-reaching implications for digital advertising and social commerce relied on heavily by beauty brands.
Product safety litigation returned to the spotlight as Johnson & Johnson’s third attempt to shut down talc-related lawsuits failed, reopening a flood of claims. A California jury later awarded US$40 million in a talc–ovarian cancer case, while the company separately settled a biometric privacy lawsuit tied to its Neutrogena Skin360 app under Illinois’ stringent BIPA law. Unilever, Aeropres and Voyant Beauty also moved toward settlement over benzene contamination concerns in dry shampoo aerosols, reinforcing the legal and reputational stakes of safety transparency.
Class actions linked to marketing and labelling gathered pace. e.l.f. Cosmetics faced claims in California alleging misleading packaging that left products up to 50% empty, while Revlon was sued over allegations that its Almay wipes were falsely advertised as biodegradable. Dermalogica was accused of mislabelling products as “Made in the USA” despite foreign-sourced ingredients, and Shein agreed to pay US$700,000 to settle claims tied to late deliveries and refund failures under California law—each case reflecting heightened scrutiny of consumer trust and disclosure.
Competition law also tightened its grip. Switzerland’s competition authority opened an antitrust investigation into Beiersdorf, examining whether Nivea pricing disadvantaged Swiss retailer Migros compared with overseas markets. At EU level, Procter & Gamble was identified as the unnamed target in a probe into suspected restrictions on cross-border sales of personal care products. In the UK, the ACSO filed a class action against Amazon, alleging anti-competitive pricing practices that inflated costs for millions of consumers.
Intellectual property disputes spanned continents. In India, the Delhi High Court ruled in favour of L’Oréal in a trademark and copyright infringement case, issuing a permanent injunction and awarding damages. The same court also became a battleground for influencer accountability, as Reckitt Benckiser sued Raj Shamani, Ritik Chaturvedi and dermatologist Dr. Manjot Marwah over allegedly misleading claims related to Dettol. In New York, Glow Recipe sued Makeup By Mario over use of the term “Watermelon Glow,” while Europe’s General Court upheld the refusal of the “JET LAG” trademark for cosmetics.
Corporate governance and investor disclosure also entered the frame. Estée Lauder was sent to court after a US judge found it may have misled investors through omissions in public disclosures. In California, Thirteen Lune CEO Nyakio Grieco faced allegations of fraud and embezzlement in a civil suit, illustrating the legal exposure facing founders as businesses scale.
Labour and supply-chain accountability cases added another layer. Paris judges examined whether Yves Rocher breached France’s duty of vigilance law over alleged labour violations in Turkey, with a ruling expected in 2026. Meanwhile, Coty escalated tensions with Kering and Gucci by filing suit over the Gucci beauty licence ahead of its transfer to L’Oréal.
Enforcement actions reinforced that litigation is not limited to headline court battles. Sephora agreed to pay US$775,000 to settle claims related to improper disposal of hazardous waste in California, a reminder that operational compliance failures can quickly become legal liabilities.
Taken together, 2025 marked a year when legal exposure became impossible to ignore. From privacy and competition to product safety, marketing claims and governance, the courtroom increasingly served as a frontline for resolving disputes that once played out quietly or commercially. For beauty and personal care companies, the message was unmistakable: in a more regulated, transparent and litigious environment, legal strategy is no longer reactive—it is integral to doing business.
The post 2025 in Review: See You in Court – Litigation Intensifies Amid Heightened Scrutiny appeared first on Global Cosmetics News.