Philip Morris Brands Sàrl v Secretary of State for Health (...

Facts

• Philip Morris Brands Sàrl and others challenged Directive 2014/40/EU, which imposed plain packaging and large pictorial health warnings for tobacco products.
• The Directive aimed to harmonize tobacco control laws across EU Member States and address serious public health concerns related to tobacco use.
• The claimants contended that the Directive breached free movement of goods and adversely affected trademark rights and consumer choice.
• The legal challenge centered primarily on Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
• The CJEU assessed evidence regarding tobacco-related harm and considered whether the Directive’s measures constituted justified and proportionate restrictions on the free movement of goods.

Issues

1. Whether Directive 2014/40/EU was a justified limitation on the free movement of goods under Articles 34 and 36 TFEU.
2. Whether the Directive’s requirements, such as plain packaging and health warnings, were necessary and proportionate to achieve public health aims.
3. Whether restrictions on trademark use amounted to an unjustifiable infringement of the claimants’ rights.

Decision

• The CJEU upheld Directive 2014/40/EU, holding that its public health goals justified the restrictions on the free movement of goods.
• The adopted measures, including plain packaging and health warnings, were found appropriate, necessary, and proportionate for combating tobacco-related health risks, especially among young people.
• Limitations on the use of trademarks were held to be justified and proportional, given the evidence linking branding to consumer behavior and the overarching public health goal.
• The CJEU confirmed that trade restrictions for public health must be evidence-based and no more than necessary to achieve the objective.
• The decision provided legal certainty for Member States and clarified the permissible balance between internal market freedoms and public health protection.

Legal Principles

• Articles 34 and 36 TFEU allow restrictions on the free movement of goods for public health reasons, if measures are justified, supported by evidence, and proportionate.
• The principle of proportionality requires that measures are appropriate, necessary (where no less restrictive alternative exists), and not excessive relative to the intended aim.
• Restrictions on trademark usage, short of total prohibition, may be justified to protect public health where their effectiveness is supported by evidence.
• The decision clarified the application of the public health exception under Article 36 TFEU in the context of EU market regulation.

Conclusion

The CJEU validated Directive 2014/40/EU, establishing that the EU may regulate tobacco product packaging in the interest of public health where such measures are justified, necessary, and proportionate, and offering guidance for the balance between market freedoms and public health within the EU.