English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113311/144292 (79%)
Visitors : 50922276      Online Users : 929
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139601


    Title: 菸品包裝管制與言論自由;財產權限制之違憲審查──美國;加拿大;澳大利亞與臺灣比較
    Unconstitutional Review of Freedom of Expression and Property Rights on Tobacco Packaging Control: United States, Canada, Australia and Taiwan Compared
    Authors: 楊智傑
    Contributors: 法學評論
    Keywords: 警示圖文面積;菸品包裝管制;無裝飾包裝法;商業言論;強迫言論;財產權徵用;商標權;比例原則;言論自由
    Warning Graphic Area;Tobacco Packaging Control;Plain Packaging Law;Commercial Speech;Compelled Speech;Acquisition of Property;Trademark;Proportionality;Free Speech
    Date: 2020-09
    Issue Date: 2022-04-08 10:15:54 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 菸商對於世界各國提高菸品容器管制，尤其針對提高警示圖文面積，甚至所謂的無裝飾包裝等，已經在世界各國提出訴訟，並主張違反各國憲法保障之言論自由或財產權規定。美國二○一二年華盛頓特區巡迴上訴法院對於警示圖文面積50%之規定違憲，並採商業言論之審查標準。相對地，加拿大最高法院於二○○七年判決，認為警示圖文面積提高為50%之規定合憲，未違反言論自由。澳大利亞於二○一一年通過無裝飾包裝法，二○一二年該國高級法院判決該法並不構成財產權之徵用。這些在世界主要國家已經出現過的憲法爭議問題，以及該等國家的判決意見與討論分析方式，值得我國在後續面臨相關訴訟時，加以借鏡參考。最後回到本國脈絡，討論可能的違憲審查論述。
    Article 6 of the “Draft Amendment to the Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act” adopted by the Executive Yuan at the end of 2017 hopes to increase the current warning graphic area from 35% to 85%. At the end of May 2020, the National Health Administration of the Ministry of Health and Welfare proposed an “announcement amendment” to the Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act and attached a draft amendment. They also hope to increase the current 35% area to 85%. Tobacco merchants have filed lawsuits in various countries around the world, against the control of cigarette containers, especially the increasing area of warning graphics, even the so-called plain packaging,and claim to violate the freedom of speech or property rights guaranteed by the constitutions. In 2012, the United States Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., ruled that the warning graphic area be raised to 50% unconstitutional, and based on the review standard of commercial speech. In contrast, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in 2007 that the provision to increase the area of warning graphics to 50% was constitutional and did not violate freedom of speech. Australia passed the plain packaging law in 2011, and the country’s High Court ruled in the following year that the law does not constitute the acquisition of property. The aforementioned constitutional controversies that have occurred in major countries of the world, as well as the judgment opinions and discussion and analysis methods of these courts, are worthy of reference as Taiwan may face the relevant litigation in the future. Finally, This research concludes by returning to similar issue in Taiwan and discuss its possible constitutional review.
    Relation: 法學評論, 162, 247-325
    Data Type: article
    DOI 連結: https://doi.org/10.3966/102398202020090162004
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202020090162004
    Appears in Collections:[政大法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    24.pdf2214KbAdobe PDF2154View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback