Dias, et al. v. Souza Cruz

Plaintiffs sought damages for the death of a spouse/father, alleging that the victim was influenced by the defendant tobacco company's advertisements, which associated smoking to luxury and a good and healthy life. The defendant argued that the case should be dismissed because the plaintiffs had not filed the lawsuit in a timely way following the spouse/father's death. The Court found that the Brazilian Civil Code's provision at issue did not apply, and therefore, the Court upheld the lower court's decision in favor of the plaintiffs. The Court also required Souza Cruz to compensate the plaintiffs based on the principles of proportionality and reasonableness. 

Maria de Fátima Almeida Dias, et al. v. Souza Cruz, CNJ: 7999179-72.2005.8.13.0024, 14ª CÂMARA CÍVEL do Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de Minas Gerais [14th Civil Chamber of the Court of Justice of Minas Gerais] (2009).

  • Brazil
  • Sep 3, 2009
  • Court of Justice of Minas Gerais, 14th Civil Chamber (14ª CÂMARA CÍVEL do Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de Minas Gerais)
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff

  • Maria de Fátima Almeida dias
  • Others

Defendant Souza Cruz

Legislation Cited

Brazilian Civil Code [Código Civil]

Consumer's Defense Code, Law No. 8.078/90 [Código de Defesa do Consumidor, Lei n° 8.078/90]

Related Documents

Type of Litigation

Tobacco Control Topics

Substantive Issues

Type of Tobacco Product

None

"Cigarette manufacturers always knew that cigarettes are addictive and cause innumerable diseases. Thus, in light of the knowledge and awareness of the harmful effects caused by cigarettes to the health of smokers, there is no doubt that the respondent acting in this fashion consciously creates the risk of the result, therefore assuming the obligation to make restitution. The dispute cannot only be examined from the standpoint of the industrial production of tobacco, which is actually legal, but also from the standpoint of the free choice of the consumer, for a strategy of attractive advertising has always been and continues to be executed, associating the product with an image of success, beauty, wealth, health, affirming in a misleading manner a factual situation that is absolutely false. Furthermore, speaking of consumption, it is observed in the record of the proceedings that the verification of the disease and the respective surgery occurred while the Code of Consumer Protection was fully in force, which took effect on March 12, 1991. Accordingly, since the Law invoked involves a standard for the regulation of public order and social interest, it does not matter if the victim started smoking before it entered into force, but rather only the consequences of smoking are relevant, which, in turn, were observed after the entry into force of the legislation in question, with the solution of the dispute also being subject to the aforementioned legislation. And with the establishment of the harmfulness of cigarettes as a highly dangerous product that poses risks to the whole community, they are defective because they do not offer the safety expected of them, and the manufacturer, the producer, the creator, national or foreign, and the importer, are liable, independently of the existence of guilt, for the reparation of damages caused to consumers, in proper application of objective liability as provided for in the Code of Consumer Defense."