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.
NGP Imperial Lithuania (“Company”) was fined by the Department of Drugs, Tobacco and Alcohol Control (“Department”) for marketing "Killa ColdMint EXTRA STRONG NICOPODS" (nicotine pouches) as cessation products in violation of Lithuanian law. The Company challenged the fine in the Court of First Instance, arguing that nicotine pouches are neither tobacco products nor imitation tobacco products, but rather substitutes and are regulated as such in other countries. The Court of First Instance rejected the claim, affirming the Department’s actions as lawful.
On appeal, the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania upheld the lower court’s decision. It emphasized that public health is a fundamental value and found that the nicotine pouches were toxic, not approved as cessation aids, and the products and their packaging imitated snus, a banned product in the European Union (except Sweden). The court concluded that the product could mislead consumers and thus fell within the scope of the tobacco control law’s prohibition on products that imitate tobacco products or their packaging.