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.
On April 7, 2022, the State Consumer Rights Protection Service fined UAB Litrades Didmena, a wholesale e-cigarette distributor, 750 euros for violating the labelling and packaging laws. Among other things, the company listed the “nicotine salt” content on e-cigarette packaging, but not “nicotine” content, as was required by the law. This risked misleading consumers. Further, the company noted the e-cigarette's “Whoop Wild Berries” flavour on the packaging despite listing flavouring on e-cigarette packaging being prohibited by law.
On May 2, 2023, the company appealed to the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court. In their appeal the company submitted that they only sold their e-cigarettes in Lithuania after a successful customs inspection and after having obtained a permit. The company therefore alleged that the violations were actually the result of an incomplete and negligent customs inspection. The Regional Court disagreed, concluding that a customs inspection did not mean a product met all requirements for retail sale. The Regional Court dismissed the appeal.
The company then appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania where it submitted that the Regional Administrative Court did not reasonably consider the company’s arguments and evidence. The Supreme Court of Lithuania disagreed. It concluded that the “nicotine salt” label violated the law and could mislead consumers and that the listing of “Whoop Wild Berries” flavour also violated the law.