| 英文摘要 |
The development of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have caused considerable impact on the existing tobacco control laws and regulations in various countries. In Taiwan, if e-cigarettes contain narcotic drugs, it should be regulated in accordance with the regulations by Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act. If nicotine is contained, it is a counterfeit drugs or misbranded drugs and it should be regulated in accordance with the regulations by Pharmaceutical Affairs Act; if e-cigarettes allege to have “medical help quitting smoking,” “reduce tobacco addiction,” or “reduce the effect of withdrawal symptoms,” even if it does not contain nicotine, it still violates the provisions of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act concerning advertising. If no nicotine is contained, it should be punished according to Article 14 of the Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act, “No person shall manufacture, import or sell candies, snacks, toys or any other objects in form of tobacco products.” However, Taiwan’s current regulatory model requires further clarifications and revisions. This article reviews the two related judgements of the Administrative Court in the case of Faust Company Imported e-liquid. This article considers that based on the principle of legal reservation, e-liquid is not in form of tobacco product, should not be the subject matter of Article 14 of the Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act. |
