The Queen v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd and Imperial Tobacco Ltd.
| Jurisdiction | European Union |
| Court | Court of Justice (European Union) |
| Writing for the Court | La Pergola |
| ECLI | ECLI:EU:C:2002:741 |
| Docket Number | C-491/01 |
| Date | 10 December 2002 |
| Procedure Type | Reference for a preliminary ruling |
- 1..
- Approximation of laws – Directive 2001/37 concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products – Legal basis – Article 95 EC – Improvement of the conditions for the functioning of the internal market – Protection of public health a decisive factor in the choices involved in the harmonising measures – Not relevant
- 2..
- Approximation of laws – Directive 2001/37 concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products – Legal basis – Article 95 EC – Improvement of the conditions for the functioning of the internal market – Prohibition of manufacture intended to prevent the circumvention of the marketing rules in the internal market – Included
- 3..
- Acts of the institutions – Directive 2001/37 concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products – Choice of legal basis – Criteria – Community measure pursuing a twofold basis or having a twofold component – Reference to the main or predominant purpose or component – Incorrect reference to Article 133 EC as a second legal basis – Not relevant to the validity of the directive
- 4..
- Approximation of laws – Directive 2001/37 concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products – Harmonising measures – No breach of the principle of proportionality
- 5..
- Approximation of laws – Directive 2001/37 concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products – Respect of the right to property – Trade mark – Proportionate restrictions not impairing the very substance of that right
- 6..
- Community law – Principles – Principle of subsidiarity – Application to acts adopted for the purpose of establishing the internal market – Review of observance of the principle of subsidiarity – Criteria
- 7..
- Approximation of laws – Directive 2001/37 concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products – Article 7 – Prohibition of the use of descriptors likely to mislead consumers – Applicable only to tobacco products marketed within the Community
- 1. Directive 2001/37 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products genuinely has as its object the improvement of the conditions for the functioning of the internal market and it was, therefore, possible for it to be adopted on the basis of Article 95 EC, and it is no bar that the protection of public health was a decisive factor in the choices involved in the harmonising measures which it defines. The market for tobacco products, especially cigarettes, in the Community is one in which trade between Member States represents a relatively large part. Moreover, national rules laying down the requirements to be met by products, in particular those relating to their designation, composition or packaging, are in themselves liable, in the absence of harmonisation at Community level, to constitute obstacles to the free movement of goods. The Community harmonisation measures already adopted in this sphere, namely, Directive 89/622 concerning the labelling of tobacco products and Directive 90/239 concerning the maximum tar yield of cigarettes, containing only limited requirements concerning the manufacture and labelling of tobacco products, the Member States were free to adopt national rules in respect of those aspects not covered by those directives. Having regard to the fact that the public is increasingly conscious of the dangers to health posed by consuming tobacco products, it is likely that obstacles to the free movement of those products would arise by reason of the adoption by the Member States of such national rules reflecting that development and intended more effectively to discourage consumption of those products by means of warnings and information appearing on their packaging or to reduce the harmful effects of tobacco products by introducing new rules governing their composition. Certain of the Member States had, moreover, already adopted provisions to that effect. In that context, a new harmonising directive makes it possible to prevent the appearance of impediments to the free movement of tobacco products within the Community, which would be caused by the adoption of national rules fixing differing requirements concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products. see paras 64-75
- 2. Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/37 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products lays down a prohibition on manufacturing, within the Community, cigarettes that do not comply with the maximum tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide levels fixed by that article. Although the prohibition of manufacture at issue is not a provision aimed directly at improving the conditions for the functioning of the internal market, the fact remains that a measure adopted on the basis of Article 95 EC may incorporate such a provision so long as its purpose is to ensure that certain prohibitions concerning the internal market and imposed in pursuit of that object are not circumvented, such as the prohibitions of placing cigarettes which do not comply with the requirements of Article 3(1) in free circulation or of marketing them in the Member States. see paras 82, 90
- 3. In the context of the organisation of the powers of the Community the choice of a legal basis for a measure must rest on objective factors which are amenable to judicial review. Those factors include in particular the aim and the content of the measure. If examination of a Community act shows that it has a twofold purpose or twofold component and if one of these is identifiable as main or predominant, whereas the other is merely incidental, the act must be founded on a sole legal basis, that is, the one required by the main or predominant purpose or component. The objective linked to the implementation of the common commercial policy under Article 133 EC is, in relation to the aim and content of Directive 2001/37 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products as a whole, merely secondary to the principal objective pursued by the directive, which is the improvement of the conditions for the functioning of the internal market. Article 95 EC therefore constitutes the only appropriate legal basis for the Directive and it is incorrect for the Directive to cite Article 133 EC also as a legal basis. However, that incorrect reference to Article 133 EC as a second legal basis for the Directive does not of itself mean that the latter is invalid. Such an error in the legal basis relied on for a Community measure is no more than a purely formal defect, unless it gave rise to irregularity in the procedure applicable to the adoption of that act. see paras 93-98
- 4. Directive 2001/37 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products, the objective of which is to eliminate the barriers raised by differences which still exist between those provisions and impede the functioning of the internal markets, is not invalid by reason of infringement of the principle of proportionality. The prohibition laid down in Article 3 of the Directive on releasing for free circulation or marketing within the Community cigarettes that do not comply with the maximum levels of tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide, together with the obligation imposed on the Member States to authorise the import, sale and consumption of cigarettes which do comply with those levels, in accordance with Article 13(1) of the Directive, is a measure appropriate for the purpose of attaining the objective pursued by the Directive and one which, having regard to the duty of the Community legislature to ensure a high level of health protection, does not go beyond what is necessary to attain that objective. The prohibition, also laid down in Article 3 of the Directive, on manufacturing cigarettes which do not comply with the maximum levels fixed by the Directive is especially appropriate for preventing at source deflections in trade affecting cigarettes manufactured in the Community for export to non-member countries. Such deflections amount to a form of fraud which it is not possible to combat as efficiently by means of an alternative measure such as reinforcing controls on the Community's...
The Queen
v
Secretary of State for Health,
ex parte British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd and Imperial Tobacco Ltd
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court))
«(Directive 2001/37/EC – Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products – Validity – Legal basis – Articles 95 EC and 133 EC – Interpretation – Applicability to tobacco products packaged in the Community and intended for export to non-member countries)»
|
I - 0000 | |
|
I - 0000 | |
(Art. 95 EC; Directive 2001/37 of the European Parliament and of the Council)
(Art. 95 EC; Directive 2001/37 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Art. 3(1))
(Arts 95 EC and 133 EC; Directive 2001/37 of the European Parliament and of the Council)
(Directive 2001/37 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Arts 3, 5 and 7)
(Directive 2001/37 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Arts 5 and 7)
(Art. 95 EC)
(Art. 95 EC; Directive 2001/37 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Arts 3, 5 and 7)
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
111 cases
-
Pia Messner v Firma Stefan Krüger.
...95 CE en tant que base juridique, voir, notamment, arrêt du 10 décembre 2002, British American Tobacco (Investments) et Imperial Tobacco, C-491/01, Rec. p. I-11453, points 59 et 60). Voir, également, à ce sujet, à propos de la directive 97/7, Donnelly, M. et White, F., «The Distance Selling......
-
Arnold André GmbH & Co. KG v Landrat des Kreises Herford.
...a éste el derecho a optar por productos del tabaco menos nocivos. Estas cuestiones pueden apreciarse mediante una simple remisión al asunto C‑491/01 y a otras sentencias del Tribunal de Justicia sobre restricciones a la libre circulación de mercancías. Por tanto, no las examinaré en mis con......
-
French Republic v European Parliament and Council of the European Union.
...André (C‑434/02, Rec. p. I-0000), apartado 45, y de 10 de diciembre de 2002, British American Tobacco (Investments) e Imperial Tobacco (C‑491/01, Rec. p. I‑11453), apartado 122. Véanse entre otras, las sentencias de 18 de noviembre de 1987, Maizena (137/85, Rec. p. 4587), apartado 15; de 7 ......
-
Planta Tabak-Manufaktur Dr. Manfred Obermann GmbH & Co. KG v Land Berlin.
...on labelling are eliminated (see, to that effect, judgment of 10 December 2002, British American Tobacco (Investments) and Imperial Tobacco, C‑491/01, EU:C:2002:741, paragraph 98 Directive 2014/40 leaves the proprietors of the trade marks referred to in Article 13(1)(c) and (3) the freedom ......
Get Started for Free
6 books & journal articles
-
The emerging role of the EU as a primary normative actor in the EU Area of Criminal Justice
...Commission on Subsidiarity and Proportionality, COM(2011) 344 final, 2), and theCourt has defined them as an authoritative guidance, Case C-491/01, The Queen v. Secretary of State for Health, ex parte British American Tobacco(Investments) Ltd and Imperial Tobacco Ltd [2002] ECR I-11453, par......
-
El principio de reconocimiento mutuo en los sistemas políticos descentralizados
...p. I-8419, apdos. 84 y 95), y STJCE de 10 de diciembre de 2002, asunto sobre fabricación, presentación y venta de los productos del tabaco C-491/01 (Rec., 2002, apdo. 43). En esta línea, el abogado general Fenelly había airmado en sus conclusiones que las competencias armonizadoras «son con......
-
El incierto futuro de los acuerdos bilaterales sobre protección de inversiones celebrados por los Estados Miembros de la Unión Europea
...fuera referido a un ámbito de competencias que habrían de tor- 11 En este sentido, véase la STJ en el asunto British American Tobacco (C-491/01), de 10-12-2002 [Rec. pg. I-11453, apdo. 179]; en la doctrina, L.M. HINOJOSA MARTÍNEZ, «Las relaciones financieras de la UE con el exterior», en El......
-
Pacientes y sistemas sanitarios en el punto de mira de la UE. Antecedentes y contexto de la nueva Directiva sobre derechos de los pacientes en la asistencia sanitaria transfronteriza
...protección de la salud. Ver STJ, de 5.10.2000, as. Alemania/PE contra Consejo (C-376/98); STJ, de 10.12.2002, as. British American Tobacco (C-491/01). 101 Véase punto 4, letra a) de la Exposición de Motivos de la propuesta de la Comisión. La Comisión considera que en relación a la movilidad......
Get Started for Free