煙草在線據(jù)法新社報道編譯　　國際煙草巨頭菲莫公司在周一（6月4日）起訴挪威，聲稱挪威政府對零售店的煙草展示禁令違反了歐洲競爭法規(guī)。

　　菲莫挪威公司的發(fā)言人安妮·愛德華（Anne Edwards）告訴法新社說，“我們發(fā)起訴訟的原因是，如果不能在零售店展示我們的煙草產(chǎn)品，如挪威目前的禁令，很明顯我們很難在市場上進行競爭……畢竟卷煙是一種合法產(chǎn)品。”

　　該宗訴訟案于本周一（6月4日）在奧斯陸地方法院開庭審理，將持續(xù)到6月13日結(jié)束。

　　挪威效仿愛爾蘭和冰島等其他幾個國家的做法，在2010年開始禁止在零售店內(nèi)展示卷煙，力圖減少卷煙產(chǎn)品的沖動型購買。

　　在挪威，卷煙被強制放在封閉的盒子里，而卷煙自動售賣機也不展示卷煙品牌標簽。

　　菲莫于2010年3月對挪威政府提起訴訟，聲稱煙草展示禁令違反了《歐洲經(jīng)濟區(qū)規(guī)則》（EEA），而奧斯陸地方法院在開庭審理前請求歐洲自由貿(mào)易聯(lián)盟（EFTA）法院提供咨詢意見。

　　歐洲自由貿(mào)易聯(lián)盟（EFTA）法院在去年9月發(fā)表意見稱，展示禁令從某種程度上阻礙了貨物的自由流通，因而違反了《歐洲經(jīng)濟區(qū)規(guī)則》。

　　聯(lián)盟法院還指出，挪威減少煙草消費的宗旨符合《歐洲經(jīng)濟區(qū)規(guī)則》，因此由奧斯陸法院做最終裁決。

　　挪威癌癥協(xié)會主席安妮·麗莎雷爾（Anne Lise Ryel）稱，“當涉及到預防癌癥和其他多種疾病時，很明顯控煙是最重要的一項舉措。”該協(xié)會在本起訴訟中代表挪威當局。

　　她告訴挪威公共廣播公司NRK說，“零售店內(nèi)的煙草展示禁令是減少卷煙使用的一項有效舉措，因為它使卷煙產(chǎn)品非正常化，保護兒童和年輕人避免接觸煙草產(chǎn)品的影響，降低戒煙者重新吸煙的機會，并且避免沖動型購買行為。”

　　與此同時，菲莫質(zhì)疑展示禁令對煙草消費產(chǎn)生的影響。

　　愛德華堅持認為，“所謂的禁令對我們的市場競爭產(chǎn)生了限制性影響，但同時對煙草消費沒有絲毫影響”，并且挪威的“非法及未納稅煙草產(chǎn)品”反而有所增長。
?
　　愛德華補充說，“我們認為我們證據(jù)充分，否則我們也不會對挪威提起訴訟。”

?

Europe: Philip Morris Sues Norway over Tobacco Display Ban

Jun 4, 2012
Agence France Presse (AFP) (fr)

　　Global tobacco giant Philip Morris began a suit Monday against Norway, claiming that the Scandinavian country's ban on the display of cigarettes in stores violates European competition rules.

　　"The reason that we filed (the suit) is that if you can't show your products in stores, which is the case in Norway now, clearly it becomes pretty difficult to compete in the market ... with what in the end is a legal product," company spokeswoman Anne Edwards told AFP.

　　The case opened in the Oslo district court Monday and was set to last through June 13.

　　Following in the footsteps of several other countries such as Ireland and Iceland, Norway in 2010 banned the display of cigarettes in stores in an attempt to cut impulse buys of tobacco products.

　　Cigarettes were banished to closed cases and cigarette dispensers do not show brand labels.

　　Philip Morris filed its lawsuit in March 2010 claiming the display ban was a violation of European Economic Area (EEA) rules and the Oslo district court requested an advisory opinion from the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) court before hearing the case.

　　That court said last September that the display ban could to a certain extent be seen as blocking the free movement of goods, thus violating EEA rules.

　　It also pointed out that Norway's aim to reduce tobacco consumption was in line with EEA regulations, thus leaving the final conclusion up to the Oslo court.

　　"The prevention of smoking is clearly the most important single initiative when it comes to preventing cancer and a number of other illnesses," said Anne Lise Ryel, who heads the Norwegian Cancer Society, which is representing Norwegian authorities in the case.

　　"The ban on displaying tobacco in stores is an effective initiative to reduce tobacco use because it blocks a normalisation of tobacco products, protects children and young people from marketing of tobacco products, reduces the risk of relapses for former smokers and avoids impulse buys," she told public broadcaster NRK.

　　Philip Morris meanwhile disputes the fact that the display ban has had an impact on tobacco consumption.

　　"What you have is a ban that is very restrictive on competition and at the same time there's been no impact on consumption," insisted Edwards, maintaining that Norway instead had seen a hike in "illegal and non-duty paid cigarettes.

　　"We think we have a good case, otherwise we would not have filed it," Edwards added.