A lower Administrative Court found JTI Austria GmBH (JTI) guilty of violating Austria's Tobacco Act for indirectly promoting tobacco products. Specifically, JTI sponsored an art gallery by placing the "JTi" logo (with a lowercase "i"), which was placed alongside the words "sponsored by" on an art gallery's pamphlets and other communications. JTI paid for the logo’s placement. JTI suggested that it aimed to "give something back to society," not to promote tobacco products. The Administrative Court held that JTI used the sponsorship for its own communications objectives, which, at least indirectly, promoted the sale of its tobacco products. The Administrative Court imposed a 700 EUR penalty.
JTI appealed, noting that there was no precedence regarding the permissibility of sponsorship services by tobacco companies for events with no direct connection to tobacco products. JTI further argued that the logo of JTI had no resemblance to a brand name or trademark symbol of a tobacco product and that its intention was not aimed at promoting tobacco products.
On appeal, the Supreme Administrative Court concluded that the legislature intended to establish comprehensive regulations for restrictions or prohibitions on sponsorship relating to tobacco products. Further, the court expressly noted that promotion does not need to be effective for it to be illegal. The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed JTI's appeal, affirming the lower Administrative Court's decision.
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 violation of the right to carry on trade, business, or profession of a person’s choice. This right may also be called the right to free enterprise or economic freedom. The industry may argue that a business should be able to conduct its business without government regulation, including whether or not to be smoke free.
A violation of the right to expression, free speech or similar right to express oneself without limitation or censorship. The industry may claim that a regulation infringes on their right to communicate with customers and the public. Similarly, they may claim that mandated warnings infringe on their freedom to communicate as they desire.
A lower Administrative Court found JTI Austria GmBH (JTI) guilty of violating Austria's Tobacco Act for indirectly promoting tobacco products. Specifically, JTI sponsored an art gallery by placing the "JTi" logo (with a lowercase "i"), which was placed alongside the words "sponsored by" on an art gallery's pamphlets and other communications. JTI paid for the logo’s placement. JTI suggested that it aimed to "give something back to society," not to promote tobacco products. The Administrative Court held that JTI used the sponsorship for its own communications objectives, which, at least indirectly, promoted the sale of its tobacco products. The Administrative Court imposed a 700 EUR penalty.
JTI appealed, noting that there was no precedence regarding the permissibility of sponsorship services by tobacco companies for events with no direct connection to tobacco products. JTI further argued that the logo of JTI had no resemblance to a brand name or trademark symbol of a tobacco product and that its intention was not aimed at promoting tobacco products.
On appeal, the Supreme Administrative Court concluded that the legislature intended to establish comprehensive regulations for restrictions or prohibitions on sponsorship relating to tobacco products. Further, the court expressly noted that promotion does not need to be effective for it to be illegal. The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed JTI's appeal, affirming the lower Administrative Court's decision.