VANCOUVER – The Canadian Cancer Society has called for stronger regulations on vaping products from both federal and provincial governments to combat rising nicotine addiction among youth. This statement comes as e-cigarette marketing practices are about to face scrutiny in a national class-action lawsuit against prominent companies in the vaping industry.
This week, the B.C. Supreme Court approved a national class-action lawsuit against Juul Labs Canada, Ltd., Juul Labs Inc., and Altria Group Inc. The case, which began in 2019, has passed a significant legal hurdle with its certification.
The Canadian Cancer Society stated that the lawsuit's certification is a crucial step in holding these companies accountable for allegedly misleading marketing tactics surrounding vaping products. The lawsuit claims that Juul products were inaccurately promoted as a safer alternative to traditional cigarettes, alongside an alleged conspiracy to hook young individuals on nicotine.
The court had postponed its decision on certification last year to permit amendments to the lawsuit after the defendants strongly resisted the idea of proceeding as a class-action. None of the allegations have been substantiated in court, and representatives for the companies did not respond to inquiries for comment.
Rob Cunningham, a lawyer and policy analyst at the Canadian Cancer Society, noted that the lengthy delays in the case fit a historical approach often employed by the tobacco industry. He highlighted that e-cigarettes containing nicotine were legalized in Canada in May 2018, shortly before the launch of Juul products.
Cunningham pointed out that several U.S. states have already settled lawsuits against Juul that raised similar issues to those presented in the class-action lawsuit. He emphasized that this case is of significant importance as it marks the first national class-action lawsuit certified against a tobacco or vaping company in Canada.
While other class-actions against tobacco companies have been permitted in Quebec and B.C., focusing on the marketing of “light” and “mild” cigarettes and health-related claims, this case will enable a nationwide examination of the issues at hand.
The recent certification decision allows the lawsuit to be assessed on its legal merits, a step Cunningham stresses is vital. He remarked, “If class certification had been denied, the plaintiffs would have had to pursue individual cases, which would be financially burdensome due to the defendants' extensive resources.”
Furthermore, the B.C. government has initiated its own lawsuit against the manufacturers of Juul products concerning health care costs attributed to vaping. Cunningham indicated that other tobacco companies might also encounter legal actions regarding their vaping products in the near future.
The Canadian Cancer Society has expressed concern over the escalating youth vaping rates in Canada, labeling the certification ruling as a significant setback for Juul and Altria, while bringing a trial closer to reality.
He argued that a comprehensive strategy is essential to diminish youth vaping, encompassing taxation, sales restrictions, marketing limitations, flavor regulations, and raising the minimum legal age to 21. Cunningham concluded that government action to enhance public policy is imperative in addressing the vaping crisis, attributing part of the increase in youth vaping to the aggressive marketing tactics deployed by companies like Juul.
