Tag: lawsuit

  • Florida Sues Juul

    Florida Sues Juul

    Image: Ulf

    Florida’s attorney general, Ashley Moody, has filed a lawsuit against Juul Labs, alleging that the company improperly marketed its products to children and offered misleading information about its products’ nicotine content, reports WUSF.

    The suit was filed in Hillsborough County Circuit Court. It seeks civil penalties and an injunction to prevent Juul “targeting children through their marketing and product design and from deceiving consumers with respect to the nicotine concentration.”

    “Juul relentlessly marketed to underage users with launch parties, advertisements using trendy-looking and young models, social media posts and free samples,” the lawsuit states. “It created a technology-focused, sleek design that could be easily concealed and sold its product in flavors known to be attractive to underage users. Juul also manipulated the chemical composition of its product to make the vapor less harsh on the throats of the young and inexperienced consumers it courted. To preserve its young customer base, Juul relied on age verification techniques that it knew were ineffective.”

    Juul responded to the lawsuit, stating that “it is disappointing to see the Florida attorney general direct her state’s resources to suing Juul Labs.”

    Juul’s response sets out “a few facts that should be understood,” including that “Florida’s attorney general initially led the negotiations between the state attorneys general and Juul Labs. For reasons that have not been explained to the public, she ultimately decided not to participate in a settlement to which 48 states and territories are now party to. Had she done so, like all those other jurisdictions, Florida would have its share of millions of dollars to help combat underage use and develop cessation programs. Instead, the Florida attorney general has now embarked on a drawn-out, expensive and uncertain legal process.”

    “Second,” the response continued, “Florida today suffers from the highest sales in the nation of illicit and potentially harmful disposable products emanating from China. These products are not in compliance with the [U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s] regulatory regime and, in many cases, are flagrantly targeting the state’s children. By contrast, over the past four years, Juul Labs has taken meaningful steps, including ceasing distribution of nontobacco, nonmenthol products in advance of FDA guidance on flavors, halting mass market product advertising, and restructuring our entire company with an emphasis on combating underage use. In part, due to these efforts, we have seen underage use of Juul products cut by 95 percent.”

    The response went on to allege that “Florida has the highest sales of these mostly foreign-made products in the United States, with over 60 percent of vapor sales dominated by disposables whose companies often disregard responsible practices with inappropriate flavor names and questionable marketing. Over the past months, we have been engaged with the attorney general’s office to help create a best-in-class program to combat illicit products. Even though Juul Labs plans to fight this case vigorously, the company remains ready to help Florida stem the tide of the proliferation of Chinese-made disposable products that have found what amounts to be a safe haven for foreign-made illegal vapor products.”

  • Tobacco giants sue Britain over plain-packaging

    Philip Morris International (PMI) and British American Tobacco (BAT) have sued the British government over plain-packaging legislation passed in March. The law, which would take effect from May 2016, requires cigarettes to be sold in packages of uniform shape and size that feature only the brand name and contain prominent graphic health warnings. England is the third and most populous country to introduce plain-packaging laws, following Australia and Ireland.

    PMI argues that England’s plain-packaging regulations “unlawfully deprive PMI of its trademarks” and should therefore be overturned, according to an article in The New York Times. London-based BAT stated that the British government had left the company “with no other choice” and released a statement saying that “any business that has property taken away from it by the state would inevitably want to challenge and seek compensation.” Japan Tobacco International has also indicated it would challenge England’s legislation. The tobacco companies are seeking unspecified damages, which could total billions of dollars if granted.

    A statement released by the English Department of Health said it would “not allow public health policy to be held to ransom by the tobacco industry” and that it “would not have gone ahead with standardized packaging unless we had considered it to be defensible in the courts.”

  • Ukraine drops plain-packaging lawsuit against Australia

    Ukraine has suspended the legal proceedings it brought against Australia through the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2012, which claimed the country’s plain-packaging laws were trade-restrictive. Instead, the Eastern European nation—which received financial support from British American Tobacco to pursue litigation—has stated it will attempt to seek a mutually agreed-upon solution with Australia to resolve the issue.

    Ukraine was the first of five countries to challenge Australia’s plain-packaging laws at the WTO, despite the fact that Ukraine does not currently export tobacco to Australia. The other countries who have launched lawsuits against Australia—Indonesia, Cuba, Honduras and the Dominican Republic—have not announced any plans to drop their lawsuits challenging the strict packaging laws banning company logos and requiring cigarettes to be sold in olive-colored packages with brand names printed in standardized fonts.

    According to WTO rules, Ukraine’s suspension could last one year, after which time its right to return to the panel proceedings will lapse. The WTO adjudication panel is expected to rule on the remaining plain-packaging lawsuits in the first half of 2016.

  • Canadian tobacco giants begin defense in $27 billion suit

    Three of Canada’s tobacco giants began their defense Monday against a $27-billion class-action lawsuit in Montreal by calling a witness who said the dangers of smoking are no secret.

    Historian and professor Jacques Lacoursière testified tobacco’s health risks have been common knowledge for decades. He pointed to over 700 references to the hazards of smoking dating back to the 1950s, including TV and radio reports, school manuals, government releases and health professionals.

    One of the many examples included a newspaper article that outlined a significant increase in lung cancer risk following the prolonged use of cigarettes. The proceedings will continue on Tuesday with the plaintiffs’ cross-examination of Lacoursière.

    “What these historians miss is all the coverage that came out in the media about how the industry was involved in a conspiracy to hide all that information,” said Damphousse François, the Quebec director of the Non-Smoker’s Rights Association.

    “They knew about the health effects of their products, but they didn’t meet the obligation to inform their public about what they knew.”

    The class-action lawsuit, which is being touted as the biggest civil case in Canadian history, was first filed years ago. The complainants, two groups of individuals representing a total of 1.8 million Quebecers, allege three tobacco companies did everything possible to encourage addiction:

    • Imperial Tobacco.
    • JTI-MacDonald.
    • Rothmans, Benson & Hedges.

    One group involves individuals who have become seriously ill from smoking, and members of the other group say they are unable to quit smoking.