Limitations regarding the use of quotes
The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
The appellant challenged the court's September 20, 2023 judgment and alleged that the judge failed to consider the arguments set forth in the writ petition. The Appellate Court agreed with the previous judgment and dismissed the appeal. The Appellate Court also expunged two paragraphs of the judgment dated September 20, 2023 after the appellant tendered an unconditional apology for filing the writ petition and appeal. In his apology, the appellant confirmed that he does not promote or support tobacco consumption and has never represented the tobacco industry. Thereby, the rules requiring health warnings and disclaimers to be displayed during films shown at movie theatres, on television, and on over-the-top (OTT) streaming services were upheld.