The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject matters were reserved to the UK Parliament under the 1998 Act. Second that the Act purported to alter secondary Regulations made by the UK Parliament which again contained matters reserved to that Parliament.
Held: The company’s appeal failed. The Act provided only for matters within the competence of the Scottish Parliament.
Each such provision must be judged independently. The 1998 Act is to be interpreted according to the standards applicable to any other Act of the UK parliament. The fact that the 1998 Act described itself as being constitutional did not of itself import any special rules of construction.
The aim of sections 1 and 9 was to discourage or eliminate sales of tobacco products, and not to protect the consumer from unfair trade practices. Nor did the sections do anything to amend the Regulations.
Lord Hope said that the matters listed have a common theme: ‘It is that matters in which the United Kingdom as a whole has an interest should continue to be the responsibility of the UK Parliament at Westminster. They include matters which are affected by its treaty obligations and matters that are designed to ensure that there is a single market within the United Kingdom for the free movement of goods and services.’
Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Walker, Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption
 UKSC 61, UKSC 2012/0066, 2013 SCLR 121, 2013 GWD 1-8, 2013 SLT 2
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary
Scotland Act 1998 29(1), Tobacco and Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Act 2010 1(1) 9, Regulations (the Tobacco for Oral Use (Safety) Regulations 1992
Cited – A v The Scottish Ministers PC 15-Oct-2001
(Scotland) The power to detain a person suffering from a mental illness, in order to ensure the safety of the public, and even though there was no real possibility of treatment of the mental condition in hospital, was not a disproportionate . .
Appeal from – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate As Representing The Scottish Ministers SCS 2-Feb-2012
The company sought a reclaiming motion after dismissal of their request for judicial review of the 2010 Act of the Scottish Parliament.
Held: The appeal against the Lord Ordinary’s interlocutor was refused.
Lord Reed said that the nature . .
Cited – Sinclair Collis Ltd v Lord Advocate SCS 2012
The pursuer, a cigarette vending machine operator, challenged section 9 of the 2010 Act saying that the section was incompatible with its rights under article A1P1 of the Convention, and with article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the . .
Cited – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SC 12-Oct-2011
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR
The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable . .
Opinion – Imperial Tobacco Ltd, Re Judicial Review SCS 30-Sep-2010
(Opinion) The petitioner sought review of the 2010 Act, saying that its provisions related to matters reserved to the UK parliament by the 1998 Act, and were therefore outwith the powers granted to the Scottish Parliament.
Held: The petition . .
Cited – Martin v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 3-Mar-2010
The claimant challenged the law extending the power of Sheriffs sitting alone to impose sentences of up to one year.
Held: The defendants’ appeal failed (Lord Rodger and Lord Kerr dissenting). The change was within the power of the Scottish . .
Cited – Salomon v A Salomon and Company Ltd HL 16-Nov-1896
A Company and its Directors are not same paersons
Mr Salomon had incorporated his long standing personal business of shoe manufacture into a limited company. He held nearly all the shares, and had received debentures on the transfer into the company of his former business. The business failed, and . .
Cited – Adams and Others v Lord Advocate IHCS 31-Jul-2002
(Opinion) The applicants challenged the introduction of restrictions of hunting by foxes, arguing that the law would infringe their human rights.
Held: The Act was not infringing. Fox hunting as such was not a private activity protected by the . .
Cited – DS v Her Majesty’s Advocate PC 22-May-2007
An amendment to the 1995 Act placed restrictions on the questioning of the complainer in trials of persons charged with sexual offences. The defendant appealed, saying that the restrictions were incompatible with the right to a fair trial under . .
Cited – Whaley and Another v Lord Advocate HL 28-Nov-2007
The House considered claims that the 2002 Act, which set out to make unawful the hunting of wild mammals with dogs unlawful, infringed the claimants’ human rights, in that it contravened international treaties requiring the support for traditional . .
Cited – Spiers v Ruddy PC 12-Dec-2007
Limits to Powers in Devolution Cases
Mr Spiers had complained as to the competency of two temporary sheriffs called to hear case against him, saying that the temporary nature of their appointments did not allow them to constitute an independent tribunal. He now complained that the . .
Cited – Gallagher v Lynn PC 1936
Section 4 of the 1920 Act provided that the Parliament of Northern Ireland had power to make laws for the peace, order and good government of Northern Ireland, but not to make laws in respect of, among other things, trade with any place out of . .
Cited – Regina v Montila and Others HL 25-Nov-2004
The defendants faced charges under the two Acts. They raised as a preliminary issue whether it is necessary for the Crown to prove that the property being converted was in fact the proceeds, in the case of the 1994 Act, of drug trafficking and, in . .
Cited – Kay v Burrows HL 1931
The House considered whether premises (the greater part of which was used for the storage of rags awaiting processing, sorting or subsequent despatch) fell within the proviso to s.3(1) which excluded premises ‘primarily occupied and used [for the] . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte United States Tobacco International Inc CA 1991
The applicant company produced oral snuff. It had opened a factory in the United Kingdom after the Government, on advice, had negotiated an agreement with it to restrict the marketing of the product. The committee, basing itself not on new evidence . .
Cited – Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill (Reference By The Counsel General for Wales) SC 9-Feb-2015
The court was asked whether the Bill was within the competence of the Welsh Assembly. The Bill purported to impose NHS charges on those from whom asbestos related damages were recovered.
Held: The Bill fell outside the legislative competence . .
Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 January 2021; Ref: scu.467053