“In this respect it should be noted that the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania has stated that the surreptitious advertising of tobacco products is, in principle, one of the forms and means of disseminating information about tobacco products, which usually indirectly encourages to purchase and/or consume tobacco products, therefore the concept of advertising of tobacco products is general and includes all forms and means of information directly or indirectly encouraging the purchase and/or consumption of tobacco products, including those specifically attributed by the legislator to surreptitious advertising of tobacco products. As mentioned above, the court of first instance came to the correct conclusion that the Appellant disseminated surreptitious advertising of tobacco products and considered that the information may confuse advertising consumers as to the actual purpose of presentation of such information, and therefore there is no reason to believe that in this respect the court of first instance wrongly applied the provisions of the Law on the Control of Tobacco.”
Philip Morris Baltic v. Department of Drug, Tobacco and Alcohol Control
Philip Morris Baltic v. Department of Drug, Tobacco and Alcohol Control, Ruling of 24 March 2021, Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania (2021).
- Lithuania
- Mar 24, 2021
- Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania
Philip Morris Baltic ("Philip Morris") appealed a decision by the Department of Drug, Tobacco and Alcohol Control ("the Department") fining the manufacturer 2,100 Euros for illegal tobacco advertising and promotion. A lower court had previously rejected Philip Morris's initial complaint. The advertisements in question were promoting IQOS heating devices and involved both internet advertising and point of sale advertising. Philip Morris argued that the tobacco control law does not apply to electronic devices, that the information provided was not about tobacco products or related products, nor was it presented in a way that may mislead consumers. The court upheld the Department's decision, which was based on the finding that the advertising in question constituted unlawful hidden advertising of tobacco products. In disseminating information about the IQOS device, Philip Morris was also unlawfully disseminating information about and promoting the use of tobacco products.