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 Court of Appeals upheld fines against the editor in chief of Le Point magazine, as well as the magazine itself, for publishing photos of Formula 1 drivers with cigarette advertisements on their cars and uniforms. Le Point appealed, arguing (1) Le Point did not intentionally advertise tobacco products; (2) the editor, M. Giesbert, should not be held liable for the contents of the publication; (3) Mild Seven is not a brand which is sold or recognized in France; (4) since the photographer did not know that Mild Seven was a brand of cigarette, there was no intent to advertise tobacco products in the publication; and (5) that freedom of expression prohibits the manipulation of the photograph to remove tobacco advertising from it. The Court of Cassation upheld the appellate court's decision, explaining that France's interest in promoting public health by prohibiting tobacco advertising outweighed Le Point’s right to freedom of expression.