Three e-cigarette consumers—including two managing directors of one of the plaintiff companies—and two e-cigarette companies filed a constitutional complaint challenging amendments to the Tobacco Tax Act, which introduced a tobacco tax on e-liquids. They argued that the tax's enforcement was deficient and that its structure violated the principle of equality, as it did not reflect the lower health risks of e-cigarettes compared to combustible tobacco. They also claimed that consumers could evade the tax by mixing their own nicotine-free liquids using ingredients freely available on the market.

The Federal Constitutional Court found the complaint inadmissible, citing a failure to meet the formal requirements for constitutional review. Specifically, the complainants (i) did not precisely identify the provisions being challenged, (ii) failed to exhaust alternative legal remedies as required by the principle of subsidiarity, and (iii) did not sufficiently demonstrate a direct and current violation of fundamental rights under the Basic Law (German constitution). Some of the rights and principles alleged by the complainants were: principle of equality before the law, right to personal autonomy, freedom of occupation, and right to property. The Court also found that the claim of unequal treatment in tax rates was insufficiently substantiated.