The Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice upheld Executive Decree No. 230, which had been challenged by British American Tobacco (BAT) Panama. According to BAT Panama, the decree illegally expanded the scope of Law No. 13 in areas relating to: smoke-free environments; the ban on tobacco advertisement, promotion and sponsorship; and enforcement mechanisms. Based on the constitutional right to health and on the objectives of FCTC, the tribunal upheld Executive Decree No. 230.
British American Tobacco Panamá S.A. v. Government of Panama, 618-08, Supreme Court, Contentious Administrative Chamber (2010).
Panama
Jun 3, 2010
Contentious Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court
Tobacco companies or front groups may challenge any legislative or regulatory measure that affects their business interests. Unlike public interest litigation, these cases seek to weaken health measures. These cases frequently involve the industry proceeding against the government. For example, a group of restaurant owners challenging a smoke free law as unconstitutional.
A violation of the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health. Public health advocates may claim the public’s right to health is violated by weak tobacco control measures, industry tactics, or an organization’s or smokers’ actions.
Subsequent regulations exceed the scope of the originating law.
Type of Tobacco Product
None
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.
"In addition to what has already been stated, we want to clarify that this Chamber cannot go against rules that protect the health of the population, especially in the case of serious, medically-proven health effects from the consumption of products derived from tobacco and the damage caused to the health of third parties, remembering that in accordance with Article 50 of our Magna Carta, the private interest must yield before the public or social interest."
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.
The Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice upheld Executive Decree No. 230, which had been challenged by British American Tobacco (BAT) Panama. According to BAT Panama, the decree illegally expanded the scope of Law No. 13 in areas relating to: smoke-free environments; the ban on tobacco advertisement, promotion and sponsorship; and enforcement mechanisms. Based on the constitutional right to health and on the objectives of FCTC, the tribunal upheld Executive Decree No. 230.