Court of Justice Upholds the Tobacco Products Directive 2014

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 623-628
Author(s):  
Katharina Ó Cathaoir
Keyword(s):  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Free Competition ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
Charter Member ◽  
Philip Morris ◽  
The Eu

C-547/14 Philip Morris Brands SARL and Others v Secretary of State for Health [2016] (not yet reported)C-477/14 Pillbox 38 (UK) Ltd v Secretary of State for Health [2016] (not yet reported)C-358/14 Poland v. Parliament and Council [2016] (not yet reported)Article 114 TFEU provides an adequate legal basis for the adoption of the Tobacco Products Directive 2014 in full, including measures relating to flavoured tobacco, labelling and packaging, and electronic cigarettes. These measures also comply with the principles of proportionality, subsidiarity, legal certainty, equal treatment and free competition, and the rights of companies under the EU Charter. Member States may introduce further requirements in relation to packaging of tobacco products that are not harmonised by the Directive.

scholarly journals “Breaking through the Foul and Ugly Mists of Vapours”— Regulation of Alternative Tobacco and Related Products by the New TPD and Exercise of EU Competence

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 1291-1348
Author(s):  
Anatole Abaquesne de Parfourus
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Member States ◽  
Its Analysis ◽  
Philip Morris

AbstractDirective 2014/40—the new Tobacco Products Directive—was unsuccessfully challenged in three cases,Philip Morris,Poland v. European Parliament and Council, andPillbox 38. This Article examines provisions of the Directive relating to some alternative tobacco and related products, both in terms of exercise of EU competence and substantive regulation of these products. The main flavored tobacco products can no longer be placed on the market. Electronic cigarettes are regulated by the Directive, as the initial provisions of the Commission proposal were substantially amended. The new Tobacco Products Directive reproduced the prohibition of tobacco for oral use, already at issue in theSwedish MatchandArnold Andrécases, and again subject of another preliminary ruling reference by Swedish Match, the Advocate General's Opinion having concluded in its validity. The Directive also provides the possibility for Member States to prohibit categories of tobacco or related products. Parallel to its analysis of their substance in terms of health regulation, this Article considers European Union competence issues relating to these provisions and examines the adequacy of the Article 114 TFEU internal market legal basis as well as compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity.

What’s in a Name? Equal Treatment, Union Citizens and National Rules on Names and Titles

ICL Journal ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ágoston Mohay ◽  
Norbert Tóth
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Union Citizenship ◽  
Constitutional Identity ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Relevant Judgment

AbstractThe construction of names and the use of nobility titles is not regulated by European Union law. Yet the Court of Justice of the EU has had to deal with such issues on various occasions where national rules on names or titles had to be contrasted with the EU law on equal treatment, Union citizenship and free movement and residence. Rules on names fall essentially within the competence of the member states, but the states have to regard EU law when exercising this competence. Our paper undertakes to analyse this issue in light of a recent relevant judgment, the Bogendorff von Wolffersdorff case, having regard also to the Court’s reasoning regarding the national constitutional identity clause [Art 4 (2)TEU]. We argue – inter alia – that the Court of Justice decided in this judgment not to favour the rights of a free-moving EU citizen (even if the judgment admittedly affects only a limited circle of individuals) and put national constitutional identity first, yet the way in which the identity clause was used by the Court is also debatable in our view.

Alcohol-flavoured tobacco products

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert K Jackler ◽  
Callie K VanWinkle ◽  
Isabela M Bumanlag ◽  
Divya Ramamurthi
Keyword(s):  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Alcoholic Beverage ◽  
Tobacco Product ◽  
Online Search ◽  
Product Lines ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Product Categories ◽  
Philip Morris ◽  
Widespread Availability ◽  
Google Search

BackgroundIn 2009, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned characterising flavours in cigarettes (except for menthol) due to their appeal to teen starter smokers. In August 2016, the agency deemed all tobacco products to be under its authority and a more comprehensive flavour ban is under consideration.ObjectivesTo determine the scope and scale of alcohol-flavoured tobacco products among cigars & cigarillos, hookahs and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes).MethodsAlcohol-flavoured tobacco products were identified by online search of tobacco purveyors’ product lines and via Google search cross-referencing the various tobacco product types versus a list of alcoholic beverage flavours (eg, wine, beer, appletini, margarita).Results48 types of alcohol-flavoured tobacco products marketed by 409 tobacco brands were identified. Alcohol flavours included mixed drinks (n=25), spirits (11), liqueurs (7) and wine/beer (5). Sweet and fruity tropical mixed drink flavours were marketed by the most brands: piña colada (96), mojito (66) and margarita (50). Wine flavours were common with 104 brands. Among the tobacco product categories, brands offering alcohol-flavoured e-cigarettes (280) were most numerous, but alcohol-flavoured products were also marketed by cigars & cigarillos (88) and hookah brands (41). Brands by major tobacco companies (eg, Philip Morris, Imperial Tobacco) were well represented among alcohol-flavoured cigars & cigarillos with five companies offering a total of 17 brands.ConclusionsThe widespread availability of alcohol-flavoured tobacco products illustrates the need to regulate characterising flavours on all tobacco products.

scholarly journals A Qualitative Exploration of Consumers’ Perceived Impacts, Behavioural Reactions, and Future Reflections of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (2017) as Applied to Electronic Cigarettes

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 1179173X2092545
Author(s):  
Emma Ward ◽  
Claudia Anholt ◽  
Sarah Gentry ◽  
Lynne Dawkins ◽  
Richard Holland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Negative Impact ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Smoking Behaviour ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Raising Awareness ◽  
Perceived Impacts ◽  
Qualitative Exploration ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
The Eu

Background: Electronic cigarette regulations included in the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), Article 20, implemented in Europe by May 2017, aimed to improve safety for e-cigarette consumers, and prevent uptake among non-smokers, particularly young people. Before implementation, there were significant concerns from consumers, industry, and some in the scientific community about the potential negative impact of the TPD on people using e-cigarettes to remain abstinent from smoking. To date, there is limited evidence on how the TPD has affected consumers. This study aimed to add insight into how consumers perceived and experienced the regulations. Methods: Qualitative data, collected between March 2018 and March 2019, relating to participant views of the TPD were extracted from 160 interviews/extended surveys of e-cigarette consumers as part of a wider study into e-cigarette use trajectories (ECtra study). Data were thematically analysed. Results: Awareness of the TPD among consumers was not universal. Participants’ smoking behaviour did not appear to be influenced by the legislation. Participants were reassured by manufacturing regulations and requirements for ingredients labels. Participants responded negatively to changes perceived to cause inconvenience and extra plastic waste. The product restrictions prompted some participants to purchase non-compliant products illegally, potentially putting their safety at risk. Conclusions: E-cigarette regulation should focus on ensuring product safety. Raising awareness of the TPD among consumers and smokers could be beneficial.

scholarly journals Awareness, experience and prevalence of heated tobacco product, IQOS, among young Korean adults

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. s74-s77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinyoung Kim ◽  
Hyunjae Yu ◽  
Sungkyu Lee ◽  
Yu-Jin Paek
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Tobacco Product ◽  
Health Claims ◽  
Cigarette Smokers ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Korean Adults ◽  
Philip Morris ◽  
The Government ◽  
Korean Market

IntroductionPhilip Morris International introduced ‘IQOS’ to the Korean market in June 2017. To monitor the use of IQOS among young Korean adults, we identified their awareness, experience and current use of IQOS.MethodsThree months after the introduction of IQOS in Korea, we conducted an online survey with 228 general young adults, aged 19–24 years.Results87 participants (38.1%) were aware of IQOS, 13 (5.7%) were IQOS ever users and 8 (3.5%) were current IQOS users. All the current IQOS users were triple users of conventional cigarettes and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). There were no IQOS-only users and one IQOS ever user was a non-cigarette smoker. Among the eight current IQOS users who smoked 9.1 conventional cigarettes a day on average, four smoked 10–20 HEETS sticks a day. The current IQOS users decided to use IQOS because they believed it was less harmful or to stop smoking. The current conventional cigarette smokers were much more likely to be aware of IQOS (OR 4.496; 95% CI 2.185 to 9.250) and to be IQOS ever users (OR 11.649; 95% CI 1.024 to 132.564).ConclusionAwareness, experience and use of IQOS among young Korean adults were relatively higher than among their Japanese counterparts. Current IQOS users were more likely to smoke conventional cigarettes and/or e-cigarettes, which contradicts the tobacco industry’s claims that conventional cigarette smokers will switch to heated tobacco products. Until obtaining robust evidence concerning heated tobacco products, the government should regulate the tobacco industry’s marketing tactics and health claims.

Please Smoke Your E-Cigarette Proportionally

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-87
Author(s):  
Marco Inglese
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Health Protection ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Directive 2014/40/eu harmonises the manufacture, sales and presentation of tobacco and related products, notably, electronic cigarettes. As its predecessors, Directive 2014/40/eu has already been challenged on three occasions. This article will tackle the Pilbox case and assesses the impact of the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity on market harmonisation and health protection. It seeks to demonstrate that, contrary to the old-fashioned stream of case law on this subject, the battlefield has been shifted from the scope of Art. 114 tfeu to the impact of general principles of eu law. It then assesses how health protection increasingly permeates internal market legislations, leading to a sort of ‘paternalistic’ harmonisation. Finally, it argues that after two decades of disputes concerning tobacco products, the Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) has successfully ended litigations on Directive 2014/40/eu, holding that its compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity is beyond doubt.

TOBACCO ADVERTISING: IF YOU MUST, YOU MAY

2001 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Hillion
Keyword(s):  
European Parliament ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Member States ◽  
Tobacco Advertising ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
European Court

InGermany v. European Parliament and Council (Case C-376/98, judgment of 5 October 2000) the European Court of Justice held that Directive 98/43/EC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the advertising and sponsorship of tobacco products ([1998] O.J. L 213/9), the legality of which had been challenged in various earlier cases (e.g., Cases T-172/98 and T-175/98 to T-177/98 Salamander AG et al. v. European Parliament and Council; Case C-74/99 The Queen and Secretary of State for Health ex parte Imperial Tobacco Ltd. and Others), was invalid.

scholarly journals European adult smokers’ perceptions of the harmfulness of e-cigarettes relative to combustible cigarettes: cohort findings from the 2016 and 2018 EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii38-iii45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon Gravely ◽  
Pete Driezen ◽  
Christina N Kyriakos ◽  
Mary E Thompson ◽  
James Balmford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Generalized Estimating Equations ◽  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Estimating Equations ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Significant Change ◽  
Don't Know Responses ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Background This study presents perceptions of the harmfulness of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) relative to combustible cigarettes among smokers from six European Union (EU) countries, prior to the implementation of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), and 2 years post-TPD. Methods Data were drawn from the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys, a cohort study of adult smokers (≥18 years) from Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Spain. Data were collected in 2016 (pre-TPD: N = 6011) and 2018 (post-TPD: N = 6027). Weighted generalized estimating equations were used to estimate perceptions of the harmfulness of e-cigarettes compared to combustible cigarettes (less harmful, equally harmful, more harmful or ‘don’t know’). Results In 2016, among respondents who were aware of e-cigarettes (72.2%), 28.6% reported that they perceived e-cigarettes to be less harmful than cigarettes (range 22.0% in Spain to 34.1% in Hungary). In 2018, 72.2% of respondents were aware of e-cigarettes, of whom 28.4% reported perceiving that e-cigarettes are less harmful. The majority of respondents perceived e-cigarettes to be equally or more harmful than cigarettes in both 2016 (58.5%) and 2018 (61.8%, P > 0.05). Overall, there were no significant changes in the perceptions that e-cigarettes are less, equally or more harmful than cigarettes, but ‘don’t know’ responses significantly decreased from 12.9% to 9.8% (P = 0.036). The only significant change within countries was a decrease in ‘don’t know’ responses in Spain (19.3–9.4%, P = .001). Conclusions The majority of respondents in these six EU countries perceived e-cigarettes to be equally or more harmful than combustible cigarettes.

scholarly journals IQOS point-of-sale marketing strategies at a time of legislation transition in Israel

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Bar Zeev ◽  
C Berg ◽  
L C Abroms ◽  
H Levine
Keyword(s):  
Electronic Cigarettes ◽  
Economic Status ◽  
Marketing Strategies ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Point Of Sale ◽  
Plain Packaging ◽  
Socio Economic Status ◽  
Philip Morris ◽  
Regulatory Measures ◽  
Promotional Strategies

Abstract Background Heated tobacco products (HTP), such as Philip Morris IQOS, have penetrated the global tobacco market. Currently the only HTP on the market in Israel, IQOS was introduced in 2016. The device is sold in specialty stores and online; while the heat sticks (HEETS) are sold at traditional retailers. In 01/2019 a ban on advertisements in all media (excluding print media) and at the point-of-sale (POS) went into effect. In 01/2020, a POS display ban and plain packaging went into effect. Understanding the POS marketing strategies at a time of regulatory transition could aid regulatory efforts in other countries. Methods Observations were conducted in 80 retailers carrying HEETS in 4 large Israeli cities in 12/2019, before the POS display ban and plain packaging went into effect. Data were collected using an adapted version of the Standardized Tobacco Assessment for Retail Settings, which assessed store characteristics, product offerings, pricing, promotional strategies, and placement. Results All retailers sold cigarettes; 51% carried also electronic cigarettes. Only one retailer carried the IQOS device. HEETS packages were visible to customers in 47% of retailers. Over 60% carried at least 3 HEETS different flavours (out of 5 available). In all but one retailer, HEETS were sold at higher prices than cigarettes, on average 21% more expensive. Posted ads were uncommon. In 14.5% of retailers, a special IQOS product display cast was prominent. Additionally, 25% of retailers placed cigarettes and 14% placed HEETS near youth-oriented merchandise. Conclusions This study provides insights into IQOS marketing strategies during a period of regulatory transition. Findings suggest that IQOS-specific promotions were not common, but a proportion of retailers highlighted IQOS via displays and/or proximity to youth-oriented merchandise. Moreover, IQOS may be promoted to higher socio-economic status populations, as indicated by pricing and possibly by availability of products. Key messages Understanding IQOS marketing strategies at point-of-sale is critical to inform regulatory measures globally. IQOS marketing strategies in Israel at the point-of-sale suggest that IQOS is promoted to higher socio-economic status populations.

scholarly journals The EU Court of Justice Clarifies the Role of the Full-Function Criterion in the Interaction Between Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the EU Merger Regulation

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-88
Author(s):  
Vasiliki Fasoula
Keyword(s):  
Joint Ventures ◽  
Business Strategy ◽  
Joint Venture ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Free Competition ◽  
Merger Regulation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
National Competition ◽  
The One ◽  
The Eu

Case note: C-248/16 Austria Asphalt GmbH & Co OG v Bundeskartellanwalt, Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of the 7th of September 2017. Joint venture is a common business strategy that provides companies with benefits in scale economies, R&D, operational efficiencies and synergies. Joint ventures can be potentially harmful for the state of free competition in a market if they coordinate with their parent companies or if their operation can restrict access to the market for other competitors. Within the Internal Market, joint ventures fall under the scrutiny of two pieces of competition legislation in a non-cumulative way: the EU antitrust provisions and the EU Merger Regulation (EUMR) under Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4). Before the Austria Asphalt preliminary ruling, the Commission, despite its ambiguous decisional practice, considered those two paragraphs to constitute two different jurisdictional criteria applying to two different types of notifiable transactions. In Austria Asphalt the CJEU examined the correlation of those two paragraphs. It interpreted Article 3(4) as a restriction of Article 3(1)(b) by considering that the full-function criterion set by Article 3(4) should apply to all concentrative joint ventures: those newly created by a transaction as well as to those resulting from a change in the control of an existing company. In practice, the CJEU’s view limits the one-stop shop principle of the EUMR in favour of national competition authorities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document