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.
Aicha Venturini began working for Jet International (Jet) in 2000. In February 2001, Ms. Venturini complained to Jet that her employer's spouse was smoking in the workplace. Jet offered to move Ms. Venturini's office further away from the location where the spouse was smoking, but Ms. Venturini declined a new office. In March 2001, Jet terminated Ms. Venturini, allegedly for professional incompetence. Ms. Venturini brought suit and sought to have the Non-Smoker's Rights Association intervene on her behalf in order to support a claim for punitive damages. Jet argued that the employers were rarely in the office, and therefore the exposure to smoke to Ms. Venturini was minimal. Jet also argued that Ms. Venturini could have taken the offer to move to an office further away from the area with smoke, but declined. The court agreed with Jet in part, holding that Ms. Venturini could have taken the other office and upheld Jet's claim that Ms. Venturini's termination was justified. The court did not allow punitive damages, nor the intervention of the Non-Smoker's Rights Association. The court however awarded one month's pay as well as attorney fees to Ms. Venturini.