# Court case against govt. re tobacco ban



## Hooked (27/5/20)

From FB https://www.facebook.com/Fita-1512331899070066
and http://fita.co.za/fita-statement-27-may-2020/

"We can confirm that this morning we received the record of decision and reasons for the banning of the sale of cigarettes from the Respondents. We are now finalising our supplementary papers which will be served on the Respondents by no later than 29 May 2020 as per the court order of 12 May 2020 which states inter alia the following:

2.1.the Applicant may amend its notice of motion and supplement its founding affidavit by no later than 29 May 2020;

2.2.the Respondents will file their answering affidavit by no later than 3 June 2020;

2.3.the Applicant will file any replying affidavit by 6 June 2020;

2.4.the parties will exchange and file heads of argument by no later than 8 June 2020; and

2.5.the parties will approach the Deputy Judge President for a special allocation of the matter for hearing during the week of 9 June 2020 and failing which the matter will be set down for hearing in the urgent court on 9 June 2020."

Reactions: Like 5 | Informative 1


----------



## takatatak (27/5/20)

Hooked said:


> From FB https://www.facebook.com/Fita-1512331899070066
> and http://fita.co.za/fita-statement-27-may-2020/
> 
> "We can confirm that this morning we received the record of decision and reasons for the banning of the sale of cigarettes from the Respondents. We are now finalising our supplementary papers which will be served on the Respondents by no later than 29 May 2020 as per the court order of 12 May 2020 which states inter alia the following:
> ...


I really hope that this whole debacle doesn't get tied up in legal wranglings for weeks or months on end. We all know how the courts love postponing things...

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 5


----------



## Balsak (28/5/20)

takatatak said:


> I really hope that this whole debacle doesn't get tied up in legal wranglings for weeks or months on end. We all know how the courts love postponing things...



From what i have seen it seems like they are going to court on the 8th, cant remember where i saw it so dont quote me on the exact date but i know its soon

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## takatatak (28/5/20)

Hooked said:


> 2.5.the parties will approach the Deputy Judge President for a special allocation of the matter for hearing during the week of 9 June 2020 and failing which the matter will be set down for hearing in the urgent court on 9 June 2020.





Balsak said:


> From what i have seen it seems like they are going to court on the 8th, cant remember where i saw it so dont quote me on the exact date but i know its soon


Yeah, I just hope the ruling judge doesn't say _"we will review this matter in 28 days"_ or something painful like that... 

Let's hope for the best!!

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 4


----------



## Adephi (28/5/20)

Our schools and hospitals are unprepared, understaffed, extremely short on PPE's and yet so much time, energy and money is spent on this subject because the NCCC is playing hardegat. It's a disgrace really.

Reactions: Like 3 | Agree 6 | Winner 1


----------



## DavyH (29/5/20)

Fita confirmed it will be heard before the full bench of the High Court on 9 and 10 June.

The 'evidence' produced by the state appears to be unfounded. If it were clear,we wouldn't be the only country in the world adopting these measures, would we?

Reactions: Like 3 | Agree 2


----------



## DavyH (29/5/20)

This just in: BATSA have reinstituted their case against government as well.

After their previous spineless performance I'm not sure I trust them to go through with it, and there's no way they would have pulled out in the first place if it wasn't to their advantage. Maybe i'm overly suspicious of them, but driving independent vape stores out of business could only benefit Twisp sales and move them closer to a monopoly over a growth industry. A two or three week delay in the lifting of the ban could only help them with this.

Reactions: Like 3 | Agree 3


----------



## DavyH (29/5/20)

And more breaking news:

Head over to the DA's Facebook page for this one (not endorsing them as a party, just as a source).

It appears that the Minister of COGTA was less than truthful when she cited 2,000 objections to the lifting of the ban on tobacco sales when moving to level 4.

The gift that keeps on taking

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Balsak (29/5/20)

DavyH said:


> And more breaking news:
> 
> Head over to the DA's Facebook page for this one (not endorsing them as a party, just as a source).
> 
> ...



Yeah they posted the number on mybb yesterday iirc

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Amy (29/5/20)

Hopefully these guy's get somewhere and the government don't do their usual tricks of stretching court cases out....

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 3


----------



## Hooked (6/6/20)

*Cigarette sale ban: BATSA launches another attack*
https://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/cigarette-sale-ban-batsa-launches-another-attack-48964359
4 June 2020

"British American Tobacco SA (BATSA) has launched another attack on the constitutionality of the ban on cigarettes by Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs Minister Dr Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma.

The company described the regulations as an unconstitutional infringement to a number of rights enshrined in the Constitution. Dlamini Zuma, President Cyril Ramaphosa and the National Coronavirus Command Council are listed as respondents.

In papers filed at the Western Cape High Court on Wednesday, BATSA and nine other applicants state the ban on “tobacco, tobacco products, e-cigarettes and related products” infringes on the right of tobacco farmers, processors and tobacconists (tobacco shops) to freedom of trade and occupation or profession.

In terms of Section 22 of the Constitution, every citizen has the right to choose their trade, occupation or profession freely and that this may be regulated by law.

“In this application, the court is asked to decide whether regulation 45 is an unconstitutional infringement of the following rights in the Constitution – the rights of consumers of tobacco and vaping products to dignity, privacy and bodily and psychological integrity under sections 10 (human dignity), 12 (freedom and security of the person) and 14 (privacy) of the Constitution,” read BATSA’s application.

The company and other applicants said the regulations also amount to an arbitrary deprivation of the right to property of participants in the supply chain for tobacco and vaping products under Section 25 of the Constitution, which states that no one may be deprived of property except in terms of law of general application and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property. BATSA and other applicants want the regulation declared unconstitutional and invalid. 

Joining BATSA in the application are JT International SA, writer Melinda Ferguson, Keoagile Molobi, Limpopo Tobacco Processors, SA Tobacco Transformation Alliance, Black Tobacco Farmers Association, Suider Afrika Agri Inisiatief, SA Informal Traders Alliance and JJ Cale Tobacconists.

*The matter has been set down for June 22." [my highlights]*

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## takatatak (22/6/20)

Tobacco ban: Cigarettes ‘may be off-limits until August’, amid legal hurdles

Reactions: Informative 4


----------



## DavyH (22/6/20)

takatatak said:


> Tobacco ban: Cigarettes ‘may be off-limits until August’, amid legal hurdles

Reactions: Funny 4 | Can relate 8


----------



## takatatak (25/6/20)

SA’s biggest cigarette maker is now accepting orders – and some stores hope for 1 July delivery

Reactions: Like 4 | Winner 1 | Informative 3 | Optimistic 1


----------



## takatatak (25/6/20)

Good news, smokers: BAT cigarette ban court case ‘to be heard urgently’

Reactions: Like 4 | Informative 3


----------



## takatatak (26/6/20)

Legal battle over tobacco ban delayed until August 
Their coffers evidently aren't full enough yet 
_"... this delay will cost South Africa more than R1.4-billion and thousands of jobs."_

Reactions: Agree 1 | Informative 3


----------



## DavyH (26/6/20)

Judgment just out, Fita lost.

I’m appalled.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 3 | Informative 1


----------



## vicTor (26/6/20)

fcuk this shit

Reactions: Agree 4


----------



## M.Adhir (26/6/20)

DavyH said:


> Judgment just out, Fita lost.
> 
> I’m appalled.



I was wondering if they would appeal. 
But is there even really any point in doing that anymore.

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 3


----------



## THE REAPER (26/6/20)

Lets make it a smoke free South Africa take all the cars off the road and all the boilers down and no more fire to braai cause it smokes its all bad. Some worse than others. But if it smokes kill it. Cause this is shti anyway its all about getting us as children in line and bending us like they want to.

Reactions: Agree 5


----------



## mrh (26/6/20)

DavyH said:


> Judgment just out, Fita lost.
> 
> I’m appalled.


Unbelievable

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 3


----------



## DavyH (26/6/20)

THE REAPER said:


> Lets make it a smoke free South Africa take all the cars off the road and all the boilers down and no more fire to braai cause it smokes its all bad. Some worse than others. But if it smokes kill it. Cause this is shti anyway its all about getting us as children in line and bending us like they want to.



I can picture that witch’s hideous grinning face and it’s making my skin crawl. I truly feel ill.

Reactions: Agree 2 | Can relate 3


----------



## ivc_mixer (26/6/20)

Okay, so let's start off by saying I am just as upset about it as everyone else, but now let's look at what they argued. They did not argue that it is our constitutional right to smoke (in our case, vape). They did not argue that scientists have proven that smokers are equally likely to get COVID versus non-smokers and not more likely so, which is the main argument of the government, disproven by a top SA scientist recently (https://www.news24.com/news24/south...ive-in-banning-smoking-top-scientist-20200625). 

FITA argued that nicotine is a addictive substance and hence the ban needs to be lifted. From the judgment: "FITA’s argument that cigarettes ought to have been considered 'essential' because they are additive has no merit. The fact that a substance is addictive does not render it essential. We therefore find no basis on which to interpret the level five regulations as permitting the sale of tobacco products,".

In the same breath one can say that heroin is addictive, okay it's illegal as well so not really the same thing, but nonetheless. FITA should have argued less from a 'let's make money' attitude to more of a 'let's help our consumers' attitude.

Alas, now to wait until August. Let's hope BAT has better facts to present and goes about it slightly differently.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 7


----------



## mrh (26/6/20)

ivc_mixer said:


> Okay, so let's start off by saying I am just as upset about it as everyone else, but now let's look at what they argued. They did not argue that it is our constitutional right to smoke (in our case, vape). They did not argue that scientists have proven that smokers are equally likely to get COVID versus non-smokers and not more likely so, which is the main argument of the government, disproven by a top SA scientist recently (https://www.news24.com/news24/south...ive-in-banning-smoking-top-scientist-20200625).
> 
> FITA argued that nicotine is a addictive substance and hence the ban needs to be lifted. From the judgment: "FITA’s argument that cigarettes ought to have been considered 'essential' because they are additive has no merit. The fact that a substance is addictive does not render it essential. We therefore find no basis on which to interpret the level five regulations as permitting the sale of tobacco products,".
> 
> ...


I thought the essence of their argument was the unreasonableness of the regulation and I think they argued that quite clearly.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## mrh (29/6/20)

ivc_mixer said:


> Okay, so let's start off by saying I am just as upset about it as everyone else, but now let's look at what they argued. They did not argue that it is our constitutional right to smoke (in our case, vape). They did not argue that scientists have proven that smokers are equally likely to get COVID versus non-smokers and not more likely so, which is the main argument of the government, disproven by a top SA scientist recently (https://www.news24.com/news24/south...ive-in-banning-smoking-top-scientist-20200625).
> 
> FITA argued that nicotine is a addictive substance and hence the ban needs to be lifted. From the judgment: "FITA’s argument that cigarettes ought to have been considered 'essential' because they are additive has no merit. The fact that a substance is addictive does not render it essential. We therefore find no basis on which to interpret the level five regulations as permitting the sale of tobacco products,".
> 
> ...


https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opi...-addict/?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot#gsc.tab=0 SO on this topic a more thorough discussion of the weaknesses in Fita's argument. Also written by a vaper.

Reactions: Like 4 | Winner 2 | Informative 4


----------



## NecroticAngel (29/6/20)

mrh said:


> https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opi...-addict/?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot#gsc.tab=0 SO on this topic a more thorough discussion of the weaknesses in Fita's argument. Also written by a vaper.


I liked one of the commenter saying this:
Nowhere in the world has it been shown that smoking increases the risk of Covid-19 infection. In fact the facts argue just the reverse.At least 28 studies across a range of countries have found fewer smokers among Covid-19 hospital cases than in the general population. Chinese studies covering almost 6,000 Covid-19 hospital admissions, which showed that while smokers make up 26% of the Chinese population, only 6.5% of Covid-19 hospital admissions smoked.Similar figures were found when the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) looked at 7,000 Covid-19 cases early in the pandemic. The centre found that only 1.3% of those hospitalised with the virus were smokers, while 14% of all Americans regularly use tobacco products.Other researchers have subsequently reported similar findings. A study of Covid-19 cases in a Paris hospital suggested that smokers are 78% less likely to “have an adverse outcome” from the disease. Another recent meta-analysis found that smokers are 82% less likely to be hospitalised with Covid-19 in the first place.Bottom line, if you’re a smoker your chances of getting and/or surviving Covid-19 are better than those of a non-smoker.

Reactions: Like 7


----------



## DavyH (24/7/20)

....Aaaand leave to appeal was declined. Fita now approaching the SCA directly.

With luck this should be finalised before the end of 2025.

In between this and a peaceful protest by tourism operators being dispersed with water cannons and stun grenades, the South African security and justice sectors aren't living up to their job descriptions today.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 9


----------



## Hooked (24/7/20)

DavyH said:


> ....Aaaand leave to appeal was declined. Fita now approaching the SCA directly.
> 
> With luck this should be finalised before the end of 2025.
> 
> In between this and a peaceful protest by tourism operators being dispersed with water cannons and stun grenades, the South African security and justice sectors aren't living up to their job descriptions today.



SA has gone to the dogs. There is no law and order to speak of, unless you're a taxi driver with the masses behind you.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 4


----------



## Christos (24/7/20)

Hooked said:


> SA has gone to the dogs. There is no law and order to speak of, unless you're a taxi driver with the masses behind you.


Poor doggos getting a bad name being compared to SA

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 4 | Funny 1 | Can relate 1


----------



## M.Adhir (24/7/20)

What if this tobacco case was set up to fail.
Think about it.
FITA are the same crowd whose smokes are flooding the illicit market.
Normally they don't sell in SA because they are for export market only.
FITA sets up a poor case that's destined to fail.
That will also cause the BAT case to drag out.
FITA still a winner either way.
When cigs become legal again, FITA becomes a legal player. There cigs are usually cheap. So even with sin tax it might legally be 50 bucks a pack. People are used to paying that because of lockdown. So they keep buying it.


Friday conspiracy theory

Reactions: Like 4 | Agree 3 | Informative 1


----------



## HPBotha (25/7/20)

https://lifttheban.org/ 

Please go and sign - this is to help in the court battle. Please let your smoker buddies also know. 

Thanks!

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Raindance (25/7/20)



Reactions: Like 6


----------



## DavyH (4/8/20)

BAT case up for tomorrow in the Cape Division High Court and today the SCA approved Fita's request for an urgent appeal application. Government to respond by Friday, answering affidavit from Fita by Tuesday in need.

Has the worm finally turned?

Reactions: Like 2 | Informative 1


----------



## Stew (4/8/20)

The tobacco industry to me has been so sluggish in my opinion. Think they had useless legal representation as well. To me it's as if they abandoned their customers / consumers. Just my thoughts and sentiments.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 3


----------



## NecroticAngel (4/8/20)

Stew said:


> The tobacco industry to me has been so sluggish in my opinion. Think they had useless legal representation as well. To me it's as if they abandoned their customers / consumers. Just my thoughts and sentiments.


Fitas case was useless and doomed to fail, I didn't have hope for them. Batsa is much stronger IMO

Reactions: Like 3 | Agree 5


----------



## M.Adhir (4/8/20)

Stew said:


> The tobacco industry to me has been so sluggish in my opinion. Think they had useless legal representation as well. To me it's as if they abandoned their customers / consumers. Just my thoughts and sentiments.



Or they've kept large customers and avoided tax and excise. 

Was reading some stats last night. 
Exports of cigs to Namibia Swaziland and Zim from SA has skyrocketed. Even Mali. And yet there's a shortage of smokes in Namibia. 

So they are being manufactured here and declared as export but staying local. Or exported and then smuggled back in.

Practically every usual local brand is available here. But at very premium pricing.

Tobacco is a calculated dirty game, worldwide.as

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 8


----------

