Don't miss

Replay


LATEST SHOWS

THE DEBATE

The New Normal: Trump's first 100 days in office (part 1)

Read more

THE DEBATE

The New Normal: Trump's first 100 days in office (part 2)

Read more

THE CAMPAIGN BEAT

High school students make their voice heard while Marine goes fishing

Read more

FOCUS

Burma's citizens still jailed for speaking their minds

Read more

INSIDE THE AMERICAS

Colombia: FARC disarmament leads to baby boom

Read more

PEOPLE & PROFIT

French presidential election: Comparing Macron and Le Pen's economic proposals

Read more

ENCORE!

Deep Purple: 'To plan a last gig, that's very frightening!'

Read more

THE CAMPAIGN BEAT

#SansMoiLe7Mai: Voters debate whether to abstain in French run-off

Read more

EYE ON AFRICA

Kenya: At least one dead in violence linked to election primaries

Read more

Americas

US smokers allowed to sue 'light' cigarette makers

Video by FRANCE 2 , Angela YEOH

Latest update : 2008-12-16

The Supreme Court in Washington has granted three US citizens the right to pursue Marlboro maker Altria, as well as other tobacco companies, under charges of deceptively marketing "light" or "low tar" cigarettes as being healthier.

AFP - The US Supreme Court on Monday ruled that smokers can sue Altria and other tobacco companies for allegedly deceptive marketing of "light" or "low tar" cigarettes.
  
The high court said such lawsuits are allowed under federal law in a 5-4 decision that will add weight to massive claims filed by ex-smokers against Altria, whose Philip Morris unit is best known for Marlboro cigarettes, and other big tobacco producers.
  
The case involved three residents of the northeast state of Maine who puffed on Marlboro Lights and Cambridge Lights for 15 years and had argued they had a right under state law to sue the companies for allegedly deceiving smokers that light cigarettes were healthier.
  
Altria had countered the lawsuit was pre-empted by federal law and interfered with the regulatory authority of the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
  
The company argued the FTC had failed to act despite being aware that light cigarettes were no less a health hazard that regular cigarettes.
  
But the justices upheld an earlier ruling from the First Circuit Court, which had said the main legal issue was not about health hazards, but the duty under Maine law not to deceive consumers who had bought the light cigarettes.
  
The Supreme Court also rejected another argument by Altria that there was no basis for a lawsuit because the FTC had allegedly encouraged consumers to rely on test results of lower tar and nicotine in choosing a brand.
  
The court said the FTC never obliged the tobacco industry to disclose tar and nicotine levels from the test and did not approve of the description of those results as "light" or "low tar and nioctine"  in advertising.
  
The high court's ruling does not guarantee that the three Maine residents will prevail in their lawsuit but it does allow the case to proceed in federal court.
  
If the lawsuit succeeds, Altria and other tobacco manufacturers could find themselves being forced to pay out staggering legal settlements to ex-smokers.

Date created : 2008-12-15

COMMENT(S)