FASHIONING ACCOUNTABILITY: THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAST FASHION

Authored By: Edinyang Mary Emmanuel

ABSTRACT

This research examines the legal consequences of fast fashion, addressing the labour, intellectual property, consumer protection, and environmental issues it poses. It discusses the various legislations which can be relied on to curb fast fashion. Although existing laws in Nigeria touch on the various aspects of fast fashion, they lack sector-specific provisions, which allow fast fashion brands to escape liability. This research utilises a doctrinal approach. The study finds that while international and domestic laws are important in order to curb fast fashion, a bespoke law on fast fashion will do much better. This study is significant because it highlights the gaps in Nigeria’s current legal framework, offering pathways for reform and contributing to global conversations on sustainable fashion law.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This article adopts a doctrinal approach. It makes use of statutory instruments like case law, regulations, and constitutional provisions as its primary sources. The secondary sources include journal articles, and a report from the International Labour Organisation (ILO).

INTRODUCTION

Recently, the French government introduced a bill, Anti-Fast Fashion Law, which prohibits the engagement in, and promotion of fast fashion. What then do you think will be the legal consequence of fast fashion? Before we dive into that, it is trite to set the foundation for better understanding. Therefore, the meaning of fast fashion, legal framework relating to fast fashion, judicial interpretations of fast fashion will be discussed. It is important to discuss this because one of the current pressing issues in the fashion industry is sustainability, and fast fashion contributes to this problem. The fashion industry is known to be one of the hugest contributors to labour exploitation. The objective of this work is to understand the legal aftermath of fast fashion.

WHAT IS FAST FASHION?

Fast fashion refers to “inexpensive clothing produced by mass-market retailers in response to the latest trends.”1 It has certain implications, which attract legal consequences, such as labour exploitation, and environmental hazards, among other harmful practices frowned upon across various jurisdictions. It is a practice that makes high-end products available at cheaper rates. This makes use of inexpensive materials. While there is no strict legal/judicial definition of this term, there are still laws that frown at its components, and courts often recognise its characteristics as distinct claims, and not “fast fashion”. It is often characterised by labour exploitation, mass-production, environmental degradation and intellectual property infringement.

LEGAL FRAMEWORK

There are various laws at both the national and international sphere that focus on the various characteristics of fast fashion. Some of the treaties at the international level are the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Conventions. Nigeria lacks specific laws against fast fashion, but has broader environmental and labour regulation, which are major aspects of fast fashion. Some of these laws are the constitution2, the Labour Act 3, Trade Unions Act 4, Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act5, regulations6 and Act7 established by the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency, etc.

INTRENATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs)

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) is an agenda for sustainable development adopted by all members of the United Nations. It aims to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure that by 2030, everyone enjoys prosperity and peace. The UN SGDs are vital in order to curb, not just one, but all ugly aspects of fast fashion. Although they are not legally binding, they are highly persuasive. There are 17 SDGs, and some that are relevant to fast fashion are: decent work and economic growth (SDG 8); responsible consumption and production (SDG 12); climate action (SDG 13); gender equality (SDG 5); and good health and well-being (SDG 3). These SDGs help to hinder the “throwaway culture” associated with fast fashion, which leads to textile waste and overproduction.

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) Conventions

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) is an agency of the United Nations. It aims to advance social justice, through the promotion of decent work for all. There are many conventions by the ILO, which have been ratified by many countries, including Nigeria. It has core labour standards, which are often violated by textile/fashion industries. ILO Conventions contribute to mitigating various aspects of fast fashion concerned with labour. Some of the issues it covers are child labour8; workers’ rights9; fair wages; and health and safety.10 This legislation influences the domestic legislation of other countries, which helps to strengthen the labour practices across industries, including fashion.

NATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK

The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria

The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provides for the fundamental rights of every individual that must not be violated. With regards to the concerns of fast fashion, some of these rights are the right to life11, and the right to human dignity12. By subjecting workers to unfair working conditions, these rights are violated. The lives of workers are threatened, when made to work in unsafe and hazardous environments. And their right to dignity of labour is tampered with when treated in ways that degrade their humanity. Section 20 makes the first provision on environmental protection in Nigeria. It states that the State shall protect and improve the environment and safeguard the water, air and land, forest and wildlife of Nigeria. This places a duty on the State, indirectly, to curb the fast fashion practices that degrade the environment and its resources, such as pollution, the emission of Greenhouse gases and the use of non-biodegradable materials.

Labour Act

By virtue of section 7 of the Nigerian Labour Act, employers must give workers written terms of employment. This is a requirement that is often evaded in fast fashion supply chains, as oral, precarious contract are usually made. This law is very important, because it defines “worker” in its definition section. This helps in formulation and proof of arguments as to whether or not garment factory workers fall under this protection. The Act has other provisions on wages13; rest hours, holidays, sick leave14; employment of women at night15; and employment of young persons16. The Trade Unions Act also plays a huge role in mitigating fast fashion. It does not address fast fashion explicitly, however. The roles of trade unions are often undermined, as employers often seek to escape liability through sub-contraction. The Act guarantees unions the right of peaceful picketing and lawful strikes17, as well as immunities upon registration18. This gives the union the courage and full force to speak up peacefully on behalf or its members (workers) facing unfair working conditions.

The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act

Consumers also deserve protection from fast fashion. Some consumers promote it deliberately, while some do so ignorantly. The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act established by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission which has two main objectives19: to promote and maintain fair competition; and to protect the welfare and interests of consumers by providing access to safe products and services. The Act charges the Commission with the duty to ensure that businesses do not engage in unfair or deceptive trade practices, and to promote sustainable and responsible business practices that protect consumer interests.20 This Act looks out for the consumers of fast fashion. Some of the rights consumers are guaranteed under this Act are: right to be informed about good and services in plain and understandable language21; right to select from a variety of goods and services at competitive prices22; and right to fair value, good quality, and safety23. The Commission also has the right to recall harmful products from the market. This could apply to toxic fabrics or clothing that violates environmental standards.24 All these rights help to ensure the disclosure of supply chain practices, sustainability claims, and material composition, in order to avoid greenwashing.

National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment) Act (NESREA ACT)

The National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment) Act (NESREA ACT) is the mother law on the environment in Nigeria. It was established by the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency. It also plays a role in curbing the harmful environmental practices of fast fashion. This can be seen through the provisions of the functions and powers of the Agency, the prohibition of operations without permit, the offences, and penalties. The Act provides that the Agency is mandated to enhance compliance with laws, guidelines, policies, and standards on environmental matters.25 This includes regulating wastes from textile and fashion industries. NESREA has the power to enforce environmental regulations, issue compliance notices, and take measure against non

compliant industries.26 This helps to ensure that the fashion industry can be held accountable for pollution and unsustainable practices. The Act provides that any industry, whose operations impact the environment must obtain a permit from the Agency27. More often than not, fast fashion involves the use of non-biodegradable materials, which impacts the environment negatively. Fashion/textile companies need clearance to ensure sustainable practices. The Act states that it is an offence to fail to comply with environmental standards28. This clearly show that a lot of brands should be in trouble. By virtue of this provision of the NESREA Act, such brands can be prosecuted. Interestingly, the Act stipulates fines and penalties for individuals and corporate bodies who fail to comply with environmental standards.29

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION

The court has not given an official definition of the term “fast fashion”. It has however, acknowledged certain characteristics of fast fashion across different cases brought before it. The court rarely defines it as a legal term. Rather, the specific legal claims under it are what the court addresses. The court often addresses issues of misleading environmental claims and infringement of intellectual property in fast fashion cases. Some fashion brands give consumers the impression that they use eco-friendly products, and observe fair labour practices, when in fact, they do not observe sustainability. Also, some brands often make in large quantities, dupes of another brand’s authentic products. This often awakens intellectual property disputes. It is trite to know that with fast fashion, enforcement comes from multiple angles: criminal prosecution, regulatory enforcement, civil remedies, and even consumer/state litigation. It is no doubt that consumer litigation is one of the most common forms of enforcement, as the court’s docket is often filled with cases against brands/designers for labour exploitation and misleading environmental claims.

A landmark case in fashion that captures the consequences of fast fashion in the Rana Plaza case30. This case underlines the consequence of fast fashion, 1,100 lives were lost due to unsafe working conditions. Although this is a pressing issue, it is not untrue that recourse legal remedy for the consequences of fast fashion is difficult.31 Also, in the case of Edwards v. Boohoo.com UK Ltd & Ors32, where a claim was brought by designer Sonia Edwards for intellectual property infringement, the court acknowledged fast fashion as “rapid production of inexpensive clothing mirroring fleeting trends.”

CONSEQUENCES OF FAST FASHION

Fast fashion is a sacrifice of labourers, resources, and the environment for instant gratification. Although in jurisdictions like Nigeria, where there is no official law against “fast fashion”, promoters and partakers of fast fashion can be punished for their unethical and unlawful exhibit. The consequences of fast fashion can be viewed from various angles.

Labour Consequences
Environmental Consequences
Consumer Consequences
Intellectual Property Consequences

Under the Labour Act, employers are required to give employees a written contract of the terms of their employment. Failure to comply with this provision can amount to the payment of fine or imprisonment. By virtue of section 73, inspectors can enforce compliance, and brands involved in exploitative practices can be sanctioned. Also, the Trade Unions Act prohibits the restriction of workers’ rights to organise. A lot of fast fashion employers that violate this risk liability for restricting collective bargaining.

The NESREA Act stipulates penalties for non-compliance with environmental standards by individuals and corporations. Offences under this Act attract payment of fines or imprisonment. This includes liability for textile waste, use of harmful chemicals/dyes, illicit dumping, and even the failure to comply with eco-friendly packaging requirements.

The FCCPA prohibits the use of misleading labels and advertisements. This is a violation that fast fashion brands often commit. Greenwashing can lead to liability under this Act, as consumers are denied the right to the correct information of the products they purchase. The Act empowers the Commission to impose fines, remedies, seizure of good, and even shut down operations, where deception is quite severe.

Most fast fashion products are a reproduction of some other original high-end product. This creates the risk of intellectual property infringement. Fast fashion brands often face legal action for design theft and copyright infringement. This is demonstrated in the case of Edwards v. Boohoo.com. However, within Nigeria, remedy can be pursued under the Copyright Act.33 These remedies are benefits to the injured party, and a punishment to the violator. Some of these remedies are damages and injunctions. These punishments do not just incur financial loss on the violators, but also reputational damage.

It can be seen that fast fashion has gross legal consequences, more than it looks at face value. These consequences span financial loss, reputational damage, damages, compensation orders, injunctions, and in severe instances, imprisonment.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Although Nigeria has ratified ILO Conventions, their implementation in the fast fashion sector remains limited. Also, the persuasive nature of the UN SDGs serves as a gap. They are fundamental guidelines that would make great changes in the fashion sector, if made legally binding. Nigeria, as well as other countries battling with the dangers of fast fashion can make a bespoke “Anti-Fast Fashion Law.” Unlike Nigeria and many other countries, France has introduced a bill, often referred to as Anti-Fast Fashion Law, which directly targets the fast fashion industry, rather than relying on general labour, consumer, or environmental laws. This approach is significant, because while existing Nigerian laws, such as Labour Act, NESREA Act, and FCCPA address issues related to workers, the environment, and consumer protection, they only do so on a broad sense. As a result, it is relatively easy for fashion companies to escape liability by finding gaps between these general provisions. However, a sector-specific law would close these loopholes by addressing fast fashion as a distinct issue, which makes accountability and enforcement more straightforward and efficient.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Recent developments in global fashion law, such as the Edwards v. Boohoo.com case in the UK, and the proposed bill, Anti-Fast Fashion Law, show that the judiciary and legislature are willing to take steps to address the issue of fast fashion. Edwards’ case shows the court’s willingness to combat intellectual property infringement often committed by fast fashion brands. Nationally, Nigeria has been moving toward sustainable packaging requirements. Fast fashion is not just about the products, but also the package and delivery of the products. Products might be labelled and marketed as “sustainable”, when in reality, the brands make use of cheap single-use hang tags, poly bags, etc. By mandating sustainable alternatives, Nigeria indirectly places pressure on fast fashion companies to consider environmental costs, thereby contributing to the broader legal framework regulating the fashion industry.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Talking about the consequences of fast fashion is not enough to tackle this growing issue. Fast fashion is growing faster, and the law should grow faster than in order to curb it. There should be more daring legislations and enforcement, in order to usher in the rise of slow fashion. Below are some practicable recommendations for policy makers, and other stakeholders.

Strengthen Labour Law Enforcement and Encourage Trade Union Involvement The punishments for violation of labour rights should be clear, preventive, and deterrent. There should be proper labour inspections in garment supply chains, in order to ensure adherence to national and international labour standards. The role of trade unions should not be undermined in the fashion industry, as the rights of workers are diluted and exploited through subcontracting practices.
Incorporate Sustainability into Consumer Protection

The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission and other relevant regulatory bodies should compel transparent labelling of fast fashion products, such as the labour conditions, its origin, and environmental footprints. The commission should also provide, through its regulations, strict sanctions for misrepresentation.

Expand the Scope of the NESREA Act

NESREA should adopt specific regulations for textile and garment waste management, in order to address fast fashion’s role in environmental degradation.

Encourage Trade Union Involvement

The role of trade unions should not be undermined in the fashion industry, as the rights of workers are diluted and exploited through subcontracting practices.

Judicial Proactivity

Nigerian courts should progress like the UK and Indian courts, begin interpreting existing laws in light of modern concerns of sustainability and labour exploitation, even thought there is no explicit fast fashion legislation. It should also examine and apply cross-boarder decisions, where necessary, in order to improve its jurisprudence.

Promote Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as Legal Duty

Fashion retailers and manufacturers should be compelled to meet sustainability reporting standards. CRS obligations should not just be mere voluntary commitments. 6. International Cooperation

There should be cooperation between countries and national/international bodies like the United Nations to curb the widespread of fast fashion practices within the fashion industry. Countries should also align with global initiatives like the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, ILO Conventions, and EU due diligence directives. 7. Enact a Bespoke “Anti-Fast Fashion” Law Many jurisdictions, unlike France, do not have a bespoke legislation on the prohibition of fast fashion. France has a dedicated Anti-Fast Fashion Law, which prohibits the promotion of and engagement in fast fashion practices. This is an example that every other jurisdiction should follow.

CONCLUSION

There is no strict legal definition of this term, but it is often associated with intellectual property infringement, labour exploitation, mass-production, and environmental pollution. There are laws at the national and international level, through which stakeholders can challenge fast fashion practices and find protection. However, there could be loopholes making them not efficient, as these laws and regulations do not tackle “fast fashion”, but merely some challenges on a broad scale. Some of these laws are the ILO Conventions, Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Trade Unions Act, and FCCPA. The legal consequences of fast fashion span financial loss, reputational damage, and imprisonment, among others. There are recent developments by the judiciary and legislature, which demonstrate their efforts to mitigate fast fashion, such as the French bill, Anti-Fast-Fashion Law, the court’s decision in the case of Edwards v. Boohoo.com, etc. Some of the recommendations to curb fast fashion are: enactment of a bespoke “Anti-Fast Fashion” Law; international cooperation; promotion of Corporate Social Responsibility (CRS) as a legal duty; judicial proactivity; and trade union involvement. Nigeria and other countries should have a tailored law that prohibits fast fashion, in order to ultimately combat fast fashion.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999) (as amended).

Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, No.1 (2019) (Nigeria). Labour Act (Cap. L1 L.F.N. 2004) (Nigeria).

National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment) Act, No. 25 (2007) (Nigeria).

Trade Unions Act (Cap. T14 L.F.N. 2004) (Nigeria).

Das v. George Weston Ltd., 2017 ONSC 4129 (Can.).

Edwards v. Boohoo.com UK Ltd., [2021] EWHC (IPEC) (UK).

State v. Sohel Rana, Crim. Case No. 55/2013 (Bangl. Ct. 2017).

Int’l Labour Org., Rana Plaza Two Years On: Progress Made & Challenges Ahead (2015), https://www.ilo.org.

ILO Convention No. 87, Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention (1948).

ILO Convention No. 98, Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention (1949). ILO Convention No. 182, Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (1999).

Wu, Megan, The Fast Fashion Fad (2020), Pop Culture Intersections, Paper 45, https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/engl_176/45.

1 Megan Wu, The Fast Fashion Fad (2020), Pop Culture Intersections, No. 45, https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/engl_176/45.

2 NIG. CONST. (1999).

3 Labour Act, Cap. L1, L.F.N. 2004.

4 Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, L.F.N. 2004.

5 Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, No. 1, L.F.N. 2019.

6 National Environmental (Textile, Wearing Apparel, Leather and Footwear Industry) Regulations, S.I. No. 34 of 2009, L.F.N. (2009); National Environmental (Sanitation and Wastes Control) Regulations, S.I. No. 28 of 2009, L.F.N. (2009).

7 National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment) Act, Cap. N164, L.F.N. 2007.

8 International Labour Organization, Worst Form of Child Labour Convention (NO. 182), June 26, 1973, 1015 U.N.T.S. 297.

9 International Labour Organization, Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention (NO. 87), July 9, 1948, 68 U.N.T.S. 17.

10 International Labour Organization, Occupational Safety and Health Convention (No. 155), June 22, 1981, 1331 U.N.T.S. 223.

11 NIG. CONST. (1999), § 33.

12 NIG. CONST. (1999), § 34.

13 NIG., Labour Act (2004), §§ 13-17.

14 NIG., Labour Act (2004), §§ 18-23.

15 NIG., Labour Act (2004), § 54.

16 NIG., Labour Act (2004), §§ 55-59.

17 NIG., Trade Unions Act (2004), §§ 30-33.

18 NIG., Trade Unions Act (2004), §§ 5-7.

19 FCCPA, § 2.

20 FCCPA, § 17.

21 FCCPA, § 120.

22 FCCPA, § 125.

23 FCCPA, § 129.

24 FCCPA, § 144.

25 NESREA Act, § 2.

26 NESREA Act, § 7.

27 NESREA Act, § 8.

28 NESREA Act, § 25.

29 NESREA Act, § 27.

30 State v. Sohel Rana, Crim. Case No. 55/2013 (Bangl. Ct. 2017); Int’l Labour Org., Rana Plaza Two Years On: Progress Made & Challenges Ahead (2015), available at https://www.ilo.org.

31 Das v. George Weston Ltd., 2017 ONSC 4129 (Can.).

32 Edwards v. Boohoo, [2025] EWHC 805 (IPEC).