The Health Service Executive brought an enforcement action against the operators of a pub for violation of the indoor smoking ban. The "outdoor" area of the pub in question was in between two parts of the building, surrounded on all sides and covered by a retractable canvas awning. The lower court held that the awning was not a roof and the area was outdoors; therefore, the area was exempt from the smoking ban. The High Court overturned the lower court’s decision, holding that the awning is a roof. The material which makes up the roof is irrelevant in this determination. Therefore, the smoking ban applies because this area of the pub is not “wholly uncovered by any roof, whether fixed or moveable,” as is required for an exemption under the law.
Health Service Executive v. Brookshore Ltd., [2010] IEHC 165, High Court (2010).
Government, through its agencies and officials including prosecutors, may seek to enforce its health laws. For example, the government may revoke the license of a retailer that sells tobacco products to minors. These cases may also directly involve the tobacco industry, for example, a government might impound and destroy improperly labeled cigarette packs.
A claim of a violation of a tobacco control law or statute.
Type of Tobacco Product
None
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.
"It is now well known that smoking can cause lung cancer and other fatal conditions. This was first clearly established in a seminal paper of 1950 by Sir Richard Doll. People are legally entitled to smoke if they wish. The problem is that when they do, the burning tobacco infests enclosed areas with its smoke; being present there gives the non-smoker an unhealthy dose without any compensatory pleasure. The Court would be acting in an absurd way if it did not take this reality into account. It is not possible for an argument to be accepted that any membrane covering the upper surface of a room or premises which impedes the ready dispersal of tobacco smoke is anything other than a roof. Even apart from that, ordinary common sense must prevail. Ireland has a markedly high level of rainfall and it seems to have increased in recent years, especially during the summer months. It is unpleasant to sit or stand outdoors smoking a cigarette and drinking a pint of porter while the rain tumbles down. People want respite from the elements. They do not want their drink to be watered down. Comfort and shelter are clearly the purposes of this awning. It is there to keep off the elements. It also impedes the dispersal of tobacco fumes. It is therefore a roof. It makes no difference if it is made of steel or slates, of canvas, of plastic or of glass. It is irrelevant if it leaks or it provides little in the way of insulation. What matters is that a roof is overhead and that, effectively, or less than effectively, it assists in keeping off precipitation and keeping in smoke. The area of Grace’s Pub in question was covered at the material time by a retractable roof and the learned District Judge was therefore entitled to proceed to conviction for the offence charged."
"What is a roof? This issue arises for consideration because in 2002 the Government banned smoking in a range of enclosed, as opposed to outdoor, public places, including public houses and restaurants. Some exceptions were allowed. For instance, the proprietors of establishments affected by the new law could erect an outdoor pagoda for smokers with a roof but which, under the law, had to have at least 50% of its walls missing. Another exception, the one I am concerned with, was allowed by law in relation to an unroofed area. Smoke tends to rise, after all, into the open sky. At issue here, as well, is whether a decision by a judge hearing a charge that a roof is not a roof is a finding of fact or a finding of law."
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 Health Service Executive brought an enforcement action against the operators of a pub for violation of the indoor smoking ban. The "outdoor" area of the pub in question was in between two parts of the building, surrounded on all sides and covered by a retractable canvas awning. The lower court held that the awning was not a roof and the area was outdoors; therefore, the area was exempt from the smoking ban. The High Court overturned the lower court’s decision, holding that the awning is a roof. The material which makes up the roof is irrelevant in this determination. Therefore, the smoking ban applies because this area of the pub is not “wholly uncovered by any roof, whether fixed or moveable,” as is required for an exemption under the law.