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.
Beginning in 1988, Philip Morris awarded researchers scientific prizes. In 1996, the National Committee for Tobacco Control (CNCT) brought suit alleging that the prize was a form of advertising. The trial court found that the award did not constitute advertising, and the court of appeals affirmed, finding that the award merely supported scientific research. The Court of Cassation reverse the appeals court decision, finding that the name "Philip Morris" is associated with tobacco and including this term in a scientific prize awarded to non-members of the tobacco industry constitutes unlawful advertising. The court further held that any use of a tobacco brand, whatever its purpose, is tobacco advertising. The court remanded the matter for purposes of imposing penalties.