A print ad for e-cigarettes included images of the package alongside text that stated “A BIG DEAL FOR SMOKERS.” In response to a complaint, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) investigated whether the ad was irresponsible because it encouraged non-smokers smokers to take up smoking. The ASA found that the ad did not violate the country’s advertising code because it targeted existing smokers and was clearly for a non-tobacco product. Therefore, the ASA concluded that the ad was unlikely to encourage tobacco smoking among non-smokers.
Government, through its agencies and officials including prosecutors, may seek to enforce its health laws. For example, the government may revoke the license of a retailer that sells tobacco products to minors. These cases may also directly involve the tobacco industry, for example, a government might impound and destroy improperly labeled cigarette packs.
Some jurisdictions allow an individual or organization to initiate an action against another private party who is not following a particular law. For example, a person may sue a restaurant that allows smoking despite a smoke free law. If the plaintiff is claiming the violation of the law caused physical harm, this may also be a personal injury case.
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.
Electronic and/or battery-operated devices designed to deliver an inhaled dose of nicotine or other substances. Examples include electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), electronic cigars, electronic cigarillos, electronic hookah, vaporizers, and vape pens. ENDS does not include any device or medication approved by the government as nicotine replacement therapy.
A print ad for e-cigarettes included images of the package alongside text that stated “A BIG DEAL FOR SMOKERS.” In response to a complaint, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) investigated whether the ad was irresponsible because it encouraged non-smokers smokers to take up smoking. The ASA found that the ad did not violate the country’s advertising code because it targeted existing smokers and was clearly for a non-tobacco product. Therefore, the ASA concluded that the ad was unlikely to encourage tobacco smoking among non-smokers.