Marlboro Motorcycle Helmets
R. Arul v. Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, et. al., W.P. No.26527 The High Court at Madras (2012)
- Nov 27, 2012
- The High Court of Judicature at Madras
Plaintiff R. Arul
- Pioneer Trading Company
- Rainbow Lining Industries
- Ryder Auto Accessories
- The Director, Department of Public Health and Preventative Medicine
- The Godfrey Phillips India Ltd.
- The Secretary to Governement, Health and Family Welfare Department
- The State Nodal Officer, State Tobacco Control Cell
- Vega Auto Accessories Pvt. Ltd.
Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003
Type of Litigation
Action against Government to Advance the Public Interest
An individual or organization may sue their own government in order to advance or protect the public interest. For example, an NGO may sue the government claiming the government’s weak tobacco control laws violated their constitutional right to health.
Tobacco Control Topics
Advertising, Promotion and Sponsorship
Measures restricting any form of direct or indirect tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship. (See FCTC Art. 13)
Right to Freedom of Expression
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.
Tobacco Control Law Violation
A claim of a violation of a tobacco control law or statute.
Type of Tobacco Product
A private citizen brought a public interest case seeking to compel the relevant authorities to enforce the ban on tobacco advertising against commercial vendors of motorcycle helmets with Marlboro Cigarettes advertisements. The court dismissed the petition when the government showed they had already issued notices to the commercial respondents regarding the illegality of their products. The court further ordered the State Tobacco Control respondent to take further action to ensure enforcement of the law and ban the sale of helmets with Marlboro Cigarette symbols.