Sinclair Collis Ltd, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Health & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 437 (17 June 2011)

Sinclair Collis Ltd, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Health & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 437 (17 June 2011)

The ban on tobacco vending machines, though severe in its economic impact, pursues the legitimate aim of protecting public health (especially minors) and falls within the broad margin of appreciation afforded to the Secretary of State. The proportionality principle applies, but the court should not substitute its own assessment for that of the decision-maker where the measure is well-founded and evidence-based. The Secretary of State was entitled to conclude that less restrictive alternatives were insufficient, and the ban is not disproportionate under EU law or the ECHR.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Civ 437
Parties
Claimant/1st Appellant: Sinclair Collis Limited; Defendant/respondent: Secretary of State for Health; Interested Party/2nd Appellant: Members of the National Association of Cigarette Machine Operators (NACMO)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (appeal) / Court of Appeal (civil Division) – Judgment on Appeal From Administrative Court
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Proportionality, Free Movement of Goods, Right to Property, Judicial Review, Margin of Appreciation, Tobacco Regulation
Administrative Law European Union Law Human Rights Law Public Health Law Proportionality Free Movement of Goods Right to Property Judicial Review +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sinclair Collis Limited

Claimant/1st Appellant

Secretary of State for Health

Defendant/respondent

Members of the National Association of Cigarette Machine Operators (NACMO)

Interested Party/2nd Appellant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (appeal) / Court of Appeal (civil Division) – Judgment on Appeal From Administrative Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ban on tobacco vending machines under the Health Act 2009 and related Regulations violates the principle of proportionality under EU law and the ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the margin of appreciation afforded to the Secretary of State was correctly applied
  3. 3 Whether the ban unlawfully interferes with property rights under Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The ban on tobacco vending machines, though severe in its economic impact, pursues the legitimate aim of protecting public health (especially minors) and falls within the broad margin of appreciation afforded to the Secretary of State. The proportionality principle applies, but the court should not substitute its own assessment for that of the decision-maker where the measure is well-founded and evidence-based. The Secretary of State was entitled to conclude that less restrictive alternatives were insufficient, and the ban is not disproportionate under EU law or the ECHR.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • The appeals by Sinclair Collis Limited and NACMO are dismissed.
  • The ban on tobacco vending machines under the Health Act 2009 and the Protection from Tobacco (Sales from Vending Machines) Regulations 2010 stands.