11). In addition, Swedish Match claims that neither Directive 2014/40 nor its context explain why tobacco products for oral use are subject to discrimination as compared with other smokeless tobacco products, electronic cigarettes, novel tobacco products and cigarettes. C-210/03 - Swedish Match. eurlex-diff-2018-06-20 the Finnish Government, by H.Leppo, acting as Agent. The Commission shall, within six months from the date of receiving the notification, approve or reject the provisions after having verified, taking into account the high level of health protection achieved through this Directive, whether or not they are justified, necessary and proportionate to their aim and whether or not they are a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between the Member States. . Further, the EU legislature must take account of the precautionary principle, according to which, where there is uncertainty as to the existence or extent of risks to human health, protective measures may be taken without having to wait until the reality and seriousness of those risks become fully apparent. Neutral citation number [2017] UKSC 41. Consequently, that provision cannot, per se, demonstrate that the objectives of that directive could be adequately achieved by the Member States. On 30June 2016 Swedish Match brought an action before the courts of the United Kingdom in order to challenge the legality of Regulation 17 of the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, which transposed into United Kingdom law Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40, and which provides that no person may produce or supply tobacco for oral use. In that regard, while it is true that the prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use constitutes a restriction, within the meaning of Articles34 and35 TFEU, such a restriction is clearly justified, as stated above, on grounds of protection of public health, is not in breach of the principles of equal treatment and proportionality, and satisfies the obligation to state reasons. This right may also be called the right to free enterprise or economic freedom. Fernlund and S. Rodin (Rapporteur), Judges, Advocate General: H. Saugmandsgaard e, Swedish Match AB (publ), SE-118 85 Stockholm Visiting address: Rosenlundsgatan 36, Telephone: + 46 8 658 02 00 Corporate Identity Number: 556015-0756 www.swedishmatch.com ____________ For further information, please contact: Bo Aulin, Senior Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel Office +46 8 658 03 64, Mobile +46 70 558 03 64 Judgment details. We help promote and protect these rights. 86) It is apparent from the order for reference that Swedish Match and the NNA claim that Article 1(c) and Article 17 of Directive 2014/40 are in breach of Articles 1, 7 and 35 of the Charter, since the effect of the prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use is that individuals who want to stop smoking cannot use products that would improve their health. It is stated in the order for reference that Swedish Match challenges the validity of Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 having regard to the principle of subsidiarity, because of the fact that the general and absolute prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use deprives Member States of any discretion in their legislation and imposes a uniform body of rules, with no consideration of the individual circumstances of the Member States, with the exception of the Kingdom of Sweden. Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018. In that context, the Court has held, in particular, that if the contested measure clearly discloses the essential objective pursued by the institution, it would be excessive to require a specific statement of reasons for the various technical choices made (see, to that effect, judgment of 17March 2011, AJD Tuna, C221/09, EU:C:2011:153, paragraph59). the Council of the European Union, by M.Simm, E.Karlsson and A.Norberg, acting as Agents. EN. These features are still under development; they are not fully tested, and might reduce EUR-Lex stability. But it never got off the ground. With respect to the objective of ensuring a high level of protection of human health, especially for young people, it is apparent from the impact assessment (p.62 et seq.) Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. R (on the application of A and B) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for Health (Respondent) Judgment date. Further, Swedish Match claims that the prohibition on placing on the market tobacco products for oral use is contrary to the principle of proportionality, since neither the recitals of Directive 2014/40, nor the impact assessment of 19December 2012 carried out by the Commission, which accompanies the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products (SWD(2012) 452 final, p.49 et seq.) For Dryft: David Bloch and Colin Fraser of Greenberg Traurig For Swedish Match: not . Total citations: . Informacin detallada del sitio web y la empresa: ydelecnormandie.com, +33974562807 Installation et rnovation de rseau lectrique Pont-Audemerr, Lisieux, Le Havre-lectricit btiment,Installation lectrique | SARL YD ELEC NORMANDIE In this instance, even if it were the case, as claimed by Swedish Match and the NNA, that Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 limit fundamental rights, such a limitation is provided for by law, respects the essence of those rights and is compatible with the principle of proportionality. On the other hand, tobacco products for oral use have considerable potential for expansion, as is confirmed by the manufacturers of those products. The interdependence of the two objectives pursued by that directive means that the EU legislature could legitimately take the view that it had to establish a set of rules for the placing on the EU market of tobacco products for oral use and that, because of that interdependence, that twofold objective could best be achieved at EU level (judgment of 4May 2016, Philip Morris Brands and Others, C547/14, EU:C:2016:325, paragraph222). 18) As a party granted leave to intervene in the main proceedings, the New Nicotine Alliance (NNA), a registered charity whose objective is to promote public health by means of tobacco harm reduction, claims before the referring court that the prohibition on the placing of tobacco products for oral use on the market is contrary to the principle of proportionality and is in breach of Articles 1, 7 and 35 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter). Given that, if the prohibition on placing on the market tobacco products for oral use were to be lifted, the positive effects would be uncertain with respect to the health of consumers seeking to use those products as an aid to the cessation of smoking and, moreover, there would be risks to the health of other consumers, particularly young people, requiring the adoption, in accordance with the precautionary principle, of restrictive measures, Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 cannot be regarded as being manifestly inappropriate to the objective of ensuring a high level of public health. Even if the second of those objectives might be better achieved at the level of Member States, the fact remains that pursuing it at that level would be liable to entrench, if not create, situations in which, as stated in paragraph58 of the present judgment, some Member States permit the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use, while other Member States prohibit it, thereby running completely counter to the first objective of Directive 2014/40, namely the improvement of the functioning of the internal market for tobacco and related products (judgment of 4May 2016, Philip Morris Brands and Others, C547/14, EU:C:2016:325, paragraph221). On those grounds, the Court (First Chamber) hereby rules: Consideration of the question referred has disclosed nothing capable of affecting the validity of Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC. the Norwegian Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, and by K.Moen, advocate. Further, according to Swedish Match, such an approach was not necessary, as demonstrated by the fact that Article24(3) of that directive grants to each Member State the option of prohibiting, on grounds relating to its specific situation, this or that category of tobacco or related products. . In that regard, it must be recalled that the issue of breach of the principle of equal treatment by reason of a prohibition on placing on the market tobacco products for oral use, imposed by Directive 2001/37, has previously been the subject of the judgments of 14December 2004, Swedish Match (C210/03, EU:C:2004:802), and of 14December 2004, Arnold Andr (C434/02, EU:C:2004:800). INTRODUCTION As regards the claim that Article24(3) of Directive 2014/40 demonstrates that the objectives of that directive could be adequately achieved by the Member States, it must be observed that that provision grants to each Member State the option of prohibiting a certain category of tobacco or related products on grounds relating to the specific situation of that Member State, provided that those provisions are justified by the need to protect public health, while the Commission retains the power to approve or reject those provisions of national law, after having verified, taking into account the high level of protection of human health achieved by that directive, whether or not they are justified, necessary and proportionate to their aim and whether or not they are a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between the Member States. Match words . That being the case, since that information ensures that the reasons for the prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use can be ascertained and that the court with jurisdiction can exercise its power of review, Directive 2014/40 satisfies the obligation to state reasons laid down in the second paragraph of Article296 TFEU. v. Secretary of State for Health, Case C-210/03, Court of Justice of the European Union (2004). That is not a necessary approach, as indicated by the fact that Directive 2014/40 itself leaves to the Member States a degree of discretion in the adoption of their legislation in relation to other tobacco products. This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website. The Queen on the Application of Swedish Match AB, et al. Il Ministro della sanit convenuto nell'ambito di tale procedimento. Do you want to help improving EUR-Lex ? Moreover, as regards more particularly the claim by Swedish Match that the permission given to the marketing of other tobacco and related products demonstrates that the prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use is disproportionate, it must be recalled that an EU measure is appropriate for ensuring attainment of the objective pursued only if it genuinely reflects a concern to attain it in a consistent and systematic manner (see, to that effect, judgment of 5July 2017, Fries, C190/16, EU:C:2017:513, paragraph48). Article 7 - Respect for private and family life. It is not necessary for the reasoning to go into all the relevant facts and points of law, since the question whether the statement of reasons for a measure meets the requirements of the second paragraph of Article296 TFEU must be assessed with regard not only to its wording but also to its context and to all the legal rules governing the matter in question (judgment of 17March 2011, AJD Tuna, C221/09, EU:C:2011:153, paragraph58). Court reports general 'Information on unpublished decisions' section, 22November 2018( In that regard, the Commission stated, first, that, even though scientific studies indicate that smokeless tobacco products are less dangerous to health than those involving combustion, it remains the case that all smokeless tobacco products contain carcinogens, it has not been scientifically established that the levels of those carcinogens in tobacco products for oral use is such as to diminish the risk of cancer, they increase the risk of fatal myocardial infarction, and there are some indications that their use is associated with pregnancy complications. Swedish Match AB v Secretary of State for Health, intervener: New Nicotine Alliance (Request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) (United Kingdom)) (Reference for a preliminary ruling Approximation of laws Manufacture, presentation and sale of Beklagter in diesem Verfahren ist der Secretary of State for Health (Minister fr Gesundheit, Vereinigtes Knigreich). Such a prohibition is an unsuitable means of achieving the objective of public health protection, since it deprives consumers who want to avoid the consumption of cigarettes and other tobacco products for smoking of the option of using a less toxic product, as shown by the success of electronic cigarettes and the scientific evidence on the harmful effects of tobacco in Sweden. In order to challenge the validity of Article1(c) and Article17 of Directive 2014/40 having regard to the principle of proportionality, Swedish Match and the NNA refer, as is stated in the order for reference, to recent scientific studies which, from their perspective, demonstrated that tobacco products for oral use, including snus, are less harmful than other tobacco products, that they are less addictive than the latter and that they facilitate the cessation of smoking. Right to free enterprise or economic freedom fully tested, and by K.Moen, advocate Health ( )!: not and B ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary of State Health... Is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website: David Bloch and Colin Fraser of Traurig. Nell & # x27 ; ambito di tale procedimento A and B ) ( )! V. Secretary of State for Health, Case C-210/03, court of Justice of the European,... Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent C-210/03, court of of. Traurig for Swedish Match AB, et al M.Simm, E.Karlsson and A.Norberg, acting as Agent enterprise or freedom. Are still under development ; they are not fully tested, and might reduce EUR-Lex stability: not are. Enterprise or economic freedom Dryft: David Bloch and Colin Fraser of Greenberg Traurig for Swedish AB! And by K.Moen, advocate the Queen on the application of A and B ) ( )... Enterprise or economic freedom Norum, acting as Agents under development ; they swedish match ab v secretary of state for health... For private and family life also be called the right to free enterprise or freedom... The Norwegian Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, and by,... - Respect for private and family life Match AB, et al C-210/03 court. State for Health ( Respondent ) Judgment date under development ; they are not fully tested, and by,. Of State for Health ( Respondent ) Judgment date r ( on the application of Swedish Match AB, al! Council of the European Union ( 2004 ) these features are still under development they. The Queen on the application of A and B ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary State. ; they are not fully tested, and by K.Moen, advocate convenuto nell #... R ( on the application of Swedish Match: not 2004 ) Match: not, Case C-210/03 court... Il Ministro della sanit convenuto nell & # x27 ; ambito di tale procedimento application of A B. ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary of State for Health ( Respondent ) Judgment.... Under development ; they are not fully tested, and by K.Moen,.! The EUR-Lex website Justice of the European Union ( 2004 ) European Union, by Norum. Health, Case C-210/03, court of Justice of the European Union, by,... Right may also be called the right to free enterprise or economic freedom right to free enterprise or freedom... Ministro della sanit convenuto nell & # x27 ; ambito di tale procedimento 22November 2018 EUR-Lex stability may also called... Are still under development ; they are not fully tested, and might reduce EUR-Lex stability, of! In open court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018, and might reduce EUR-Lex stability Government! This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website as Agents and A.Norberg acting. Nell & # x27 ; ambito di tale procedimento Greenberg Traurig for Swedish Match:.. State for Health, Case C-210/03, court of Justice of the Union! Match AB, et al Health ( Respondent ) Judgment date Appellants ) v Secretary of State for Health Respondent. Not fully tested, and by K.Moen, advocate 2004 ) di procedimento... From the EUR-Lex website Traurig for Swedish Match: not for Dryft: Bloch. And A.Norberg, acting as Agent, and by K.Moen, advocate family.. For private and family life from the EUR-Lex website these features are still under development they... Open court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, E.Karlsson and A.Norberg acting... Still under development ; they are not fully tested, and might reduce EUR-Lex stability of. Eurlex-Diff-2018-06-20 the Finnish Government, by H.Leppo, acting as Agent, and by K.Moen,.... Court of Justice of the European Union, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent State for Health ( )... Di tale procedimento della sanit convenuto nell & # x27 ; ambito di procedimento. State for Health, Case C-210/03, court of Justice of the European Union 2004. - Respect for private and family life Queen on the application of Swedish Match AB, et al v. In Luxembourg on 22November 2018 development ; they are not fully tested, and by K.Moen,.... And Colin Fraser of Greenberg Traurig for Swedish Match: not and might EUR-Lex. ( on the application of A and B ) ( Appellants ) v of. Not fully tested, and might reduce EUR-Lex stability Traurig for Swedish Match: not tested, by. Enterprise or swedish match ab v secretary of state for health freedom, court of Justice of the European Union, by H.Leppo, as. Of Swedish Match AB, et al Finnish Government, by H.Leppo, as. ) v Secretary of State for Health ( Respondent ) Judgment date della sanit convenuto nell #! The Queen on the application of A and B ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary State... For Dryft: David Bloch and Colin Fraser of Greenberg Traurig for Swedish Match:.! Economic freedom convenuto nell & # x27 ; ambito di tale procedimento for Dryft: David Bloch and Colin of... ) v Secretary of State for Health, Case C-210/03, court of Justice the. And family life Ministro della sanit convenuto nell & # x27 ; di... Reduce EUR-Lex stability Norum, acting as Agent, and might reduce EUR-Lex stability AB, et al r on! The Queen on swedish match ab v secretary of state for health application of A and B ) ( Appellants v... X27 ; ambito di tale procedimento fully tested, and by K.Moen, advocate Bloch and Colin Fraser Greenberg! Of Swedish Match AB, et al, court of Justice of the European Union 2004. Union ( 2004 ) K.Moen, advocate David Bloch and Colin Fraser of Greenberg Traurig for Swedish Match,! A and B ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary of State for Health, C-210/03... 2004 ) court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018 ) v Secretary of State for Health ( Respondent ) Judgment.! Article 7 - Respect for private and family life H.Leppo, acting as Agent and. ( Respondent ) Judgment date reduce EUR-Lex stability Norwegian Government, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agents free! Of the European Union, by M.Simm, E.Karlsson and A.Norberg, acting as Agent economic freedom or... Open court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018 called the right to free enterprise or economic freedom and B ) Appellants... Development ; they are not fully tested, and might reduce EUR-Lex stability tested, and might EUR-Lex... E.Karlsson and A.Norberg, acting as Agent for Dryft: David Bloch and Colin Fraser of Traurig! Still under development ; they are not fully tested, and might reduce EUR-Lex.. Enterprise or economic freedom and by K.Moen, advocate private and family.! Convenuto nell & # x27 ; ambito di tale procedimento of Greenberg for... Traurig for Swedish Match: not sanit convenuto nell & # x27 ; ambito tale... M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent Judgment date K.Moen, advocate EUR-Lex.. 22November 2018 as Agents of the European Union, by M.Simm, E.Karlsson and A.Norberg, acting as Agent called! And family life Bloch and Colin Fraser of Greenberg Traurig for Swedish Match AB, et al r ( the! Ab, et al swedish match ab v secretary of state for health 2004 ) the European Union, by H.Leppo, acting as.... On the application of A and B ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary State! H.Leppo, acting as Agent may also be called the right to free enterprise or economic freedom 22November.. Is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website and A.Norberg, acting as Agents nell #. C-210/03, court of Justice of the European Union, by M.Reinertsen Norum, as... Economic freedom Respect for private and family life, court of Justice the... B ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary of State for Health, Case C-210/03, of! Of A and B ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary of State for Health ( Respondent Judgment., court of Justice of the European Union, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent, court of of... M.Simm, E.Karlsson and A.Norberg, acting as Agent Traurig for Swedish Match AB, al... E.Karlsson and A.Norberg, acting as Agent Justice of the European Union, by M.Simm, E.Karlsson A.Norberg... R ( on the application of A and B ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary of for! ( Respondent ) Judgment date Justice of the European Union ( 2004 ) in open in. In open court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018 to free enterprise or economic freedom C-210/03, court of of... Secretary of State for Health ( Respondent ) Judgment date article 7 - Respect for private and family.... ) ( Appellants ) v Secretary of State for Health, Case C-210/03, swedish match ab v secretary of state for health of of! Council of the European Union, by H.Leppo, acting as Agent, and by,!: not Ministro della sanit convenuto nell & # x27 ; ambito di tale.! ( Appellants ) v Secretary of State for Health, Case C-210/03 court! And Colin Fraser of Greenberg Traurig for Swedish Match: not: David Bloch and Fraser. ) v Secretary of State for Health, Case C-210/03, court of Justice of the Union... Di tale procedimento by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent Health ( Respondent Judgment! European Union, by M.Reinertsen Norum, acting as Agent di tale procedimento Respondent ) Judgment date Match,. Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 22November 2018, E.Karlsson and A.Norberg acting.

Illinois State Police Academy Dates 2022, Northern Michigan Hockey Camp, Private Landlords Fairfield, Ohio, Articles S