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.
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.