TOBACCO CONTROL LAWS

McNeill v. Ontario

A prisoner challenged a prison’s no-smoking policy claiming that the policy amounted to cruel and unusual punishment and discriminated against him based on his disability of being addicted to nicotine. The court dismissed the prisoner’s challenge, finding that the smoking ban is not a punishment. Additionally, the court found that the no-smoking program, which was which was introduced to comply with a properly passed law and designed to meet the worthy goal of public health, is not cruel and unusual treatment. The court also ruled that addiction to nicotine is not a protected disability. 

DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT

McNeill v. Ontario (Ministry of Solicitor General and Correctional Services), CanLII 14947 (1998).

  • Canada
  • May 14, 1988
  • Ontario Supreme Court

Parties

Plaintiff Peter McNeill

Defendant

  • Corporation of the City of Guelph
  • Ministry of Solicitor General and Correctional Services

Legislation Cited

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

City of Guelph Smoking in the Workplace Act

Related Documents

None

Type of Litigation

Challenge to Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health
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.

Tobacco Control Topics

Smoke Free Measures
Measures to reduce or eliminate exposure to tobacco smoke. (See FCTC Art. 8)

Substantive Issues

Right to Freedom from Cruel and Unusual Punishment
A violation of the protection against cruel and unusual punishment. For example, prisoners may claim that exposure to secondhand smoke violates this right.
Employment and Disability Law Violation
A claim against an employer involving a person who is harmed by secondhand smoke exposure in the workplace. For example, an employee with asthma may sue their employer for failing to protect them from exposure to secondhand smoke in the office or an employee with cancer may sue for workers’ compensation benefits. This may also include claims for workers' compensation. Disability laws also may protect customers who are not able to patronize a business filled with smoky air because of their disability.

Type of Tobacco Product

None

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.

© 2024 Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids | Trademarks | Copyright | Privacy

Site created and maintained by