Tobacco and the effects of smoking : a comparative study of foreign legislation and recent caselaw

Abstract

This thesis is mainly a medico-legal analysis on whether governments are constitutionally justified in restricting a particular activity, that is smoking, with the objective of protecting Public Health. Hence, (after a brief analysis of the medical aspect in the first chapter), there will be a list in chapter two of the several governmental measures which were taken for this purpose. These measures include cigarette advertising bans, health warnings, control of harmful substances in tobacco, taxes, legislation on smoke free public places and workplaces and other measures aimed specifically at the protection of minors. These are measures that are then analysed in order to determine whether they are effective enough to justify the restrictions that they impose on the use of a Legal Product, that is cigarettes. Therefore we will enter in the constitutionality of these measures and on whether they breach any fundamental rights such as the freedom of expression of the tobacco industry and its consumers. This analysis will be made in chapter four after having discussed the civil and criminal aspect of this topic in chapter three. Regarding these judicial actions it is also important to take in consideration the various legal systems which vary from one state to the other. Hence, in the US, lawyers are entitled to a percentage of what the client recovers in court and all this is putting the tobacco industry in the US under pressure more than anywhere else. In the UK, there is no such system, hence there is less lobbying for the institution of such actions with the result that as it will be shown, an action against the tobacco industry in the UK has less probabilities of being successful.