Site icon swarb.co.uk

Regina v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte Gallaher and others (Judgment): ECJ 22 Jun 1993

Member States may decide size of government health warnings on cigarettes
ECJ Articles 3(3) and 4(4) of Directive 89/622 on the labelling of tobacco products provide respectively that the indications of tar and nicotine yields and the general and specific health warnings that cigarette packets must carry shall cover at least 4% of the surfaces for which they are intended. Those provisions must be interpreted as meaning that, if they consider it to be necessary, Member States are at liberty to decide, so far as domestic production is concerned, that those indications and warnings should cover a greater surface area in view of the level of public awareness of the health risks associated with tobacco consumption. In so far as those Member States cannot make subject to the same requirement products imported from the other Member States which comply with the minimum requirements of the directive, there is a risk of less favourable treatment for national products and of inequality in conditions of competition, although this is inherent in harmonization which confines itself to laying down minimum requirements.

Citations:

Times 28-Jun-1993, C-11/92, [1993] EUECJ C-11/92

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 89/622 3(3) 4(4)

Cited by:

CitedKhatun, Zeb, Iqbal v London Borough of Newham Admn 10-Oct-2003
Each applicant had been accepted as homeless by the respondent, but was then offered alternative accomodation under terms which they found unacceptable. They argued that the Regulations applied. The council had disapplied one statutory guidance in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Health, Media

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160847

Exit mobile version