Canada (Attorney General) v. JTI-Macdonald Corp.

Canada (Attorney General) v. JTI-Macdonald Corp.

The contested provisions of the Tobacco Act and the TPIR infringe s.2(b) but are, when properly interpreted, reasonable limits under s.1: promotion in ss.18-19 is confined to commercial promotion targeted at consumers (so legitimate funded scientific works are not banned); s.20's prohibition including promotions 'likely to create an erroneous impression' is tailored to combat half-truths and is justified; s.22(3) must be read to ban advertising that could be particularly appealing to young persons and is minimally impairing and justified; lifestyle advertising and sponsorship bans (including use of corporate names on sports/cultural facilities) are rationally connected and proportionate;...

Citation
2007 SCC 30
Parties
Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal: Attorney General of Canada; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: JTI-Macdonald Corp.; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc.; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd.; Intervener: Attorney General of Ontario; Intervener: Attorney General of Quebec; Intervener: Attorney General of New Brunswick; Intervener: Attorney General of Manitoba; Intervener: Attorney General of British Columbia; Intervener: Attorney General for Saskatchewan; Intervener: Canadian Cancer Society
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada of Constitutional Challenge to Federal Tobacco Act and Tobacco Products Information Regulations Under the Charter / Appeal From Quebec Court of Appeal With Cross Appeals; Reasons of Chief Justice Mc Lachlin Delivered June 28, 2007
Outcome
Appeals allowed; manufacturers' cross-appeals dismissed; impugned provisions and regulations upheld as constitutional when properly interpreted; trial judge's order restored
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Charter S.1 Proportionality/oakes Test, Advertising Regulation, Tobacco Control, Statutory Interpretation, Protection of Youth, Health Warnings, Sponsorship and Lifestyle Advertising, False or Misleading Promotion
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Public Health Law Regulatory Law Administrative Law Freedom of Expression Charter S.1 Proportionality/oakes Test Advertising Regulation Tobacco Control +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General of Canada

Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal

JTI-Macdonald Corp.

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc.

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd.

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Attorney General of Ontario

Intervener

Attorney General of Quebec

Intervener

Attorney General of New Brunswick

Intervener

Attorney General of Manitoba

Intervener

Attorney General of British Columbia

Intervener

Attorney General for Saskatchewan

Intervener

Canadian Cancer Society

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada of Constitutional Challenge to Federal Tobacco Act and Tobacco Products Information Regulations Under the Charter / Appeal From Quebec Court of Appeal With Cross Appeals; Reasons of Chief Justice Mc Lachlin Delivered June 28, 2007

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether ss.18 and 19 bar publication of manufacturer-funded scientific works
  2. 2 Whether s.20's ban on false or misleading promotion and on promotion likely to create an erroneous impression infringes s.2(b) and is justified under s.1
  3. 3 Whether s.22(3)'s ban on advertising appealing to young persons is unconstitutionally vague or overbroad

Ratio Decidendi

The contested provisions of the Tobacco Act and the TPIR infringe s.2(b) but are, when properly interpreted, reasonable limits under s.1: promotion in ss.18-19 is confined to commercial promotion targeted at consumers (so legitimate funded scientific works are not banned); s.20's prohibition including promotions 'likely to create an erroneous impression' is tailored to combat half-truths and is justified; s.22(3) must be read to ban advertising that could be particularly appealing to young persons and is minimally impairing and justified; lifestyle advertising and sponsorship bans (including use of corporate names on sports/cultural facilities) are rationally connected and proportionate;...

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; manufacturers' cross-appeals dismissed; impugned provisions and regulations upheld as constitutional when properly interpreted; trial judge's order restored

Orders

  • Allow appeals of Attorney General of Canada
  • Dismiss cross-appeals of JTI-Macdonald, Rothmans, Imperial Tobacco