The role of public law-based litigation in tobacco companies' strategies in high-income, FCTC ratifying countries, 2004-14

Sarah L. Steele, Anna B. Gilmore, Martin McKee, David Stuckler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Tobacco companies use a host of strategies to undermine public health efforts directed to reduce and eliminate smoking. The success, failure and trends in domestic litigation used by tobacco companies to undermine tobacco control are not well understood, with commentators often assuming disputes are trade related or international in nature. We analyse domestic legal disputes involving tobacco companies and public health actors in high-income countries across the last decade to ascertain the types of action and the success or failure of cases, develop effective responses. Methods WorldLii, a publicly available online law repository, was used to identify domestic court cases involving tobacco companies from 2004 to 2014, while outcome data from LexisNexis and Westlaw databases were used to identify appeals and trace case history. Results We identified six domestic cases in the UK, Australia and Canada, noting that the tobacco industry won only one of six cases; a win later usurped by legislative reform and a further court case. Nevertheless, we found cases involve significant resource costs for governments, often progressing across multiple jurisdictional levels. Discussion We suggest that, in light of our results, while litigation takes up significant time and incurs legal costs for health ministries, policymakers must robustly fend off suggestions that litigation wastes taxpayers' money, pointing to the good prospects of winning such legal battles.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)516-521
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Public Health
Volume38
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 17 Sep 2016

Fingerprint

Jurisprudence
Tobacco
Dissent and Disputes
Public Health
Tobacco Industry
Tobacco Use
Health Care Costs
Canada
Smoking
Databases
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • global health
  • governance
  • law
  • litigation
  • tobacco

Cite this

The role of public law-based litigation in tobacco companies' strategies in high-income, FCTC ratifying countries, 2004-14. / Steele, Sarah L.; Gilmore, Anna B.; McKee, Martin; Stuckler, David.

In: Journal of Public Health, Vol. 38, No. 3, 17.09.2016, p. 516-521.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b279d2ba47d24be2bd41492e82aeeaa1,
title = "The role of public law-based litigation in tobacco companies' strategies in high-income, FCTC ratifying countries, 2004-14",
abstract = "Background Tobacco companies use a host of strategies to undermine public health efforts directed to reduce and eliminate smoking. The success, failure and trends in domestic litigation used by tobacco companies to undermine tobacco control are not well understood, with commentators often assuming disputes are trade related or international in nature. We analyse domestic legal disputes involving tobacco companies and public health actors in high-income countries across the last decade to ascertain the types of action and the success or failure of cases, develop effective responses. Methods WorldLii, a publicly available online law repository, was used to identify domestic court cases involving tobacco companies from 2004 to 2014, while outcome data from LexisNexis and Westlaw databases were used to identify appeals and trace case history. Results We identified six domestic cases in the UK, Australia and Canada, noting that the tobacco industry won only one of six cases; a win later usurped by legislative reform and a further court case. Nevertheless, we found cases involve significant resource costs for governments, often progressing across multiple jurisdictional levels. Discussion We suggest that, in light of our results, while litigation takes up significant time and incurs legal costs for health ministries, policymakers must robustly fend off suggestions that litigation wastes taxpayers' money, pointing to the good prospects of winning such legal battles.",
keywords = "global health, governance, law, litigation, tobacco",
author = "Steele, {Sarah L.} and Gilmore, {Anna B.} and Martin McKee and David Stuckler",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "17",
doi = "10.1093/pubmed/fdv068",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "516--521",
journal = "Journal of Public Health",
issn = "1741-3842",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The role of public law-based litigation in tobacco companies' strategies in high-income, FCTC ratifying countries, 2004-14

AU - Steele, Sarah L.

AU - Gilmore, Anna B.

AU - McKee, Martin

AU - Stuckler, David

PY - 2016/9/17

Y1 - 2016/9/17

N2 - Background Tobacco companies use a host of strategies to undermine public health efforts directed to reduce and eliminate smoking. The success, failure and trends in domestic litigation used by tobacco companies to undermine tobacco control are not well understood, with commentators often assuming disputes are trade related or international in nature. We analyse domestic legal disputes involving tobacco companies and public health actors in high-income countries across the last decade to ascertain the types of action and the success or failure of cases, develop effective responses. Methods WorldLii, a publicly available online law repository, was used to identify domestic court cases involving tobacco companies from 2004 to 2014, while outcome data from LexisNexis and Westlaw databases were used to identify appeals and trace case history. Results We identified six domestic cases in the UK, Australia and Canada, noting that the tobacco industry won only one of six cases; a win later usurped by legislative reform and a further court case. Nevertheless, we found cases involve significant resource costs for governments, often progressing across multiple jurisdictional levels. Discussion We suggest that, in light of our results, while litigation takes up significant time and incurs legal costs for health ministries, policymakers must robustly fend off suggestions that litigation wastes taxpayers' money, pointing to the good prospects of winning such legal battles.

AB - Background Tobacco companies use a host of strategies to undermine public health efforts directed to reduce and eliminate smoking. The success, failure and trends in domestic litigation used by tobacco companies to undermine tobacco control are not well understood, with commentators often assuming disputes are trade related or international in nature. We analyse domestic legal disputes involving tobacco companies and public health actors in high-income countries across the last decade to ascertain the types of action and the success or failure of cases, develop effective responses. Methods WorldLii, a publicly available online law repository, was used to identify domestic court cases involving tobacco companies from 2004 to 2014, while outcome data from LexisNexis and Westlaw databases were used to identify appeals and trace case history. Results We identified six domestic cases in the UK, Australia and Canada, noting that the tobacco industry won only one of six cases; a win later usurped by legislative reform and a further court case. Nevertheless, we found cases involve significant resource costs for governments, often progressing across multiple jurisdictional levels. Discussion We suggest that, in light of our results, while litigation takes up significant time and incurs legal costs for health ministries, policymakers must robustly fend off suggestions that litigation wastes taxpayers' money, pointing to the good prospects of winning such legal battles.

KW - global health

KW - governance

KW - law

KW - litigation

KW - tobacco

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84996542567&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdv068

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdv068

U2 - 10.1093/pubmed/fdv068

DO - 10.1093/pubmed/fdv068

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 516

EP - 521

JO - Journal of Public Health

JF - Journal of Public Health

SN - 1741-3842

IS - 3

ER -