TOBACCO CONTROL LAWS

Vescovi, et al. v. Souza Cruz S A

The plaintiffs sought damages under various tobacco control laws from defendant tobacco company, Souza Cruz, claiming that defendant's misleading advertisements led to their husband/father's consumption of tobacco products for many years and his eventual death. The Court held in favor of the tobacco company and dismissed the case, finding that the defendant had acted in compliance with the tobacco control laws.

Maria Regina Braun Vescovi v. Souza Cruz S A, CNJ: 0033141-07.2004.8.21.0035, 1a Vara Cível do Tribunal de Justiça do Rio Grande do Sul [1st Civil Court of the Court of Justice of Rio Grande do Sul] (2011).

  • Brazil
  • Jan 10, 2011
  • 1st Civil Court of the Court of Justice of Rio Grande do Sul (1a Vara Cível do Tribunal de Justiça do Rio Grande do Sul)
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff

  • Maria Regina Braun Vescovi
  • Vinícius Vescovi
  • Vivian Vescovi

Defendant Souza Cruz S A

Legislation Cited

Law No. 9.294 (as amended)

Consumer Protection Code

Federal Constitution of Brazil, article 220

Law 9.294/96

Related Documents

None

Type of Litigation

Personal Injury
An individual or organization may seek civil damages against a tobacco company based on the claim that the use of tobacco products causes disease or death. Some of these cases will relate to general tobacco products, while others will relate to specific subcategories of tobacco products--for example, light or low products, menthol or other flavored products. Additionally, there may be cases relating to exposure to secondhand smoke.

Tobacco Control Topics

Advertising, Promotion and Sponsorship
Measures restricting any form of direct or indirect tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship. (See FCTC Art. 13)

Substantive Issues

Right to Equal Protection
A violation of the right to equal protection under the law, or another form of discrimination. The industry may claim that regulations discriminate against tobacco companies or tobacco products. Smokers may claim that addiction is a health condition, so regulations discriminate against them based on their health condition. Facilities subject to smoke free laws may claim that smoke free (SF) exceptions (e.g., hotel rooms, mental hospitals, etc.) unfairly discriminate against SF businesses because the law should apply to all locations equally.
Right to Access to Information
A violation of the public’s right to information. The tobacco industry may claim that advertising, promotion or sponsorship, or packaging regulations limit the industry’s ability to communicate information to their customers and therefore infringes on the customer’s right to receive information, and to distinguish one product from another. Alternatively, public health advocates may claim that tobacco industry misinformation violates their right to accurate information or that government must be transparent in its dealings with the tobacco industry.
Right to Self-Determination
Smokers’ rights groups may claim that governments interfere with consumers’ freedom of choice when they regulate tobacco use.
Consumer Protection Violation

Any violation of a law designed to ensure fair trade, competition, or the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. For example, a government may require businesses to disclose detailed information about products—particularly in areas where safety or public health is an issue.

Legal Product
Tobacco is a legal product and the tobacco industry is a legal industry.
Sufficiency of Scientific Evidence
A discussion on whether current scientific evidence is sufficient to justify the regulatory measures.

Type of Tobacco Product

None

View Limitations
1400 I Street N.W.,
Suite 1200,
Washington, DC 20005
United States of America

Phone: (202) 296-5469

Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is a BBB-accredited charity and a
Guidestar Exchange Gold Participant.

© 2025 Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids | Trademarks | Copyright | Privacy

Site created and maintained by