TOBACCO CONTROL LAWS

British American Tobacco Central América, S.A. v. Guatemala

British American Tobacco Central América (BAT) claimed that the provisions of the Law for Tobacco and Its Derivatives was unconstitutional because it involves double taxation on imported cigarettes sold in Guatemala, violating the constitutional principle of equality under the law by providing different treatment to imported products. The Court emphasized previous holdings where it was decided that it was unconstitutional to calculate the tax percentage over an amount that already included previous tax rates. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of BAT, finding the Law for Tobacco and Its Derivatives to be unconstitutional.

British American Tobacco Central América, S.A. v. Guatemala, Expediente 1183-2009, Corte de Constitucionalidad [Constitutional Court](2010).

  • Guatemala
  • Sep 2, 2010
  • Guatemalan Constitutional Court
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff British American Tobacco Central América, S.A.

Defendant Guatemala

Legislation Cited

Decree No. 61-77 (as amended through Decree No. 65-2001)

Related Documents

None

Type of Litigation

Challenge to Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health
Tobacco companies or front groups may challenge any legislative or regulatory measure that affects their business interests. Unlike public interest litigation, these cases seek to weaken health measures. These cases frequently involve the industry proceeding against the government. For example, a group of restaurant owners challenging a smoke free law as unconstitutional.

Tobacco Control Topics

Price and Tax Measures
Tax or price measures, including tax- and duty-free regulation. (See FCTC Art. 6)

Substantive Issues

Right to Equal Protection
A violation of the right to equal protection under the law, or another form of discrimination. The industry may claim that regulations discriminate against tobacco companies or tobacco products. Smokers may claim that addiction is a health condition, so regulations discriminate against them based on their health condition. Facilities subject to smoke free laws may claim that smoke free (SF) exceptions (e.g., hotel rooms, mental hospitals, etc.) unfairly discriminate against SF businesses because the law should apply to all locations equally.

Type of Tobacco Product

None

View Limitations
1400 I Street N.W.,
Suite 1200,
Washington, DC 20005
United States of America

Phone: (202) 296-5469

Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is a BBB-accredited charity and a
Guidestar Exchange Gold Participant.

© 2025 Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids | Trademarks | Copyright | Privacy

Site created and maintained by