From the Guardian · · 3m
Australian states plan billions lawsuit against tobacco firms
Former barrister who won landmark secondhand smoke case proposes states sue for up to $50bn in healthcare costs.
In brief
Former barrister who won landmark secondhand smoke case proposes states sue for up to $50bn in healthcare costs. Australian states are considering suing tobacco companies for billions in healthcare costs under a proposal by a barrister who previously proved secondhand smoke causes lung cancer. Originally reported by…
Barrister proposes states sue tobacco firms
Neil Francey, who won Australia's landmark 1991 case proving secondhand smoke causes lung cancer, has developed a proposal for state governments to sue tobacco companies for billions in healthcare costs.
South Australia formally seeks legal advice
The South Australian government is formally seeking advice on the proposal. Other states are also reviewing it, with Francey having briefed state government MPs.
Seeking up to fifty billion dollars
The proposal argues states could file proceedings in federal court seeking up to fifty billion dollars in compensation for health costs and to fund cancer screening programs and prevention measures.
Targeting three major tobacco companies
The proposal targets British American Tobacco, Philip Morris and Imperial Brands, along with their parent corporations overseas, under Australian consumer law for misleading and deceptive conduct.
Six states would pool legal resources
Under the plan, the six state governments would pool their resources to set up a dedicated, joint legal taskforce to run the case against the tobacco companies.
Industry has unjustly enriched itself
The proposal argues that for decades the tobacco industry has unjustly enriched itself while misleading smokers about harms and addictiveness, shifting costs to smokers and taxpayers.
“For decades, the tobacco industry has unjustly enriched itself while distracting and confusing smokers about the harms and addictiveness of their product.”
Targeting conduct since two thousand
The proposal seeks to recover healthcare costs incurred by states since two thousand, when internal tobacco industry documents revealed the industry knew smoking caused serious diseases but covered it up.
Francey's nineteen ninety-one victory
In nineteen ninety-one, Francey represented consumers in a federal court case that found compelling scientific proof that passive smoking causes lung disease in non-smokers, making industry claims unlawful.
State approach bypasses personal injury hurdles
Francey said state governments pursuing this under consumer protection laws bypass challenges faced by smokers in personal injury lawsuits, where proving which brand caused harm is difficult.
Litigation requires specific legal groundwork
Associate Professor Jonathan Liberman warns that successful Australian litigation would need specific enabling legislation and well-resourced law firms outside government to avoid consuming resources and failing procedurally.
South Australia health minister backs due diligence
South Australian health minister Blair Boyer said there is substantial public interest in the proposal but the state must conduct its own due diligence before deciding whether to proceed.
At a glance
Australian states are considering suing tobacco companies for billions in healthcare costs under a proposal by a barrister who previously proved secondhand smoke causes lung cancer.
