# C_2012291EN.01001401.xml

| 27.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 291/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 291/14

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 12 September 2011

in Case E-16/10

Philip Morris Norway AS v the Norwegian State, represented by the Ministry of Health and Care Services

(Free movement of goods — Prohibition on the visual display of tobacco products — Articles 11 and 13 EEA — Measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions — Selling arrangements — Protection of public health — Proportionality)

2012/C 291/05

In Case E-16/10, Philip Morris Norway AS v the Norwegian State, represented by the Ministry of Health and Care Services — REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Oslo District Court (Oslo tingrett), regarding the interpretation of Articles 11 and 13 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA), in particular, whether a rule prohibiting the visible display of tobacco products in retail outlets, such as the one established by Norwegian law, constitutes an unlawful restriction pursuant to Article 11 of the EEA Agreement, and, should such a restriction be found to exist, the criteria which are decisive in order to determine if the said display ban is proportionate for the purposes of Article 13 of the EEA Agreement the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Thorgeir Örlygsson (Judge-Rapporteur) and Per Christiansen, Judges, gave judgment on 12 September 2011, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | A visual display ban on tobacco products, imposed by national legislation of an EEA State, such as the one at issue in the case at hand, constitutes a measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on imports within the meaning of Article 11 EEA if, in fact, the ban affects the marketing of products imported from other EEA States to a greater degree than that of imported products which were, until recently, produced in Norway. |
| --- | --- |

1.

A visual display ban on tobacco products, imposed by national legislation of an EEA State, such as the one at issue in the case at hand, constitutes a measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on imports within the meaning of Article 11 EEA if, in fact, the ban affects the marketing of products imported from other EEA States to a greater degree than that of imported products which were, until recently, produced in Norway.

| 2. | It is for the national court to identify the aims which the legislation at issue is actually intended to pursue and to decide whether the public health objective of reducing tobacco use by the public in general can be achieved by measures less restrictive than a visual display ban on tobacco products. |
| --- | --- |

2.

It is for the national court to identify the aims which the legislation at issue is actually intended to pursue and to decide whether the public health objective of reducing tobacco use by the public in general can be achieved by measures less restrictive than a visual display ban on tobacco products.

---