Australian state governments could file lawsuits against major tobacco companies to recover tens of billions of dollars in public hospital and healthcare expenses. The proposal comes from Neil Francey, a veteran barrister who previously helped establish legally that secondhand smoke causes lung cancer.
South Australia is formally seeking advice on the plan. Other state governments are also reviewing the concept as Francey presents the blueprint at the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia annual scientific meeting in Sydney.
The proposal targets dominant tobacco firms operating in Australia, including British American Tobacco, Philip Morris, and Imperial Brands, alongside their overseas parent corporations. Six state governments would pool their resources to establish a joint legal taskforce.
Francey argues that proceedings could be filed in the federal court seeking up to $50bn in compensation. The funds would cover historical health costs and finance cancer screening programs and prevention measures. The legal strategy focuses on consumer protection laws, alleging decades of misleading and deceptive conduct regarding the addictiveness and harms of tobacco products.
South Australian Health Minister Blair Boyer said his government has sought advice on the proposal, its likelihood of success, and the benefits to the public. He said there is substantial public interest in reducing the burden of tobacco-related diseases on healthcare systems, though the state must conduct due diligence.
Representatives for New South Wales and Queensland confirmed they are reviewing the proposal or have met with its author. Western Australia stated its current efforts focus on strengthening tobacco legislation and enforcement.
A spokesperson for British American Tobacco Australia stated the company does not comment on potential legal claims. Philip Morris and Imperial Brands did not respond to requests for comment.
The proposal seeks to recover costs incurred since the year 2000, when internal documents revealed the industry knew smoking caused serious diseases and colluded to cover up the evidence. Francey stated that consumer protection laws allow states to bypass challenges faced in personal injury lawsuits, where individuals struggle to prove which specific brand caused harm.
Laura Hunter, chief executive of the Australian Council on Smoking and Health, said it is entirely reasonable for tobacco companies to bear the costs of the harm caused by their products. Similar legal actions have occurred overseas, including the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement in the United States and a recent court order in Canada involving major tobacco firms.
Legal experts have raised cautions regarding the complexity of such litigation. Jonathan Liberman, an expert in law and global health at the University of Melbourne, warned that lawsuits of this scale require specific enabling legislation and well-resourced external law firms to avoid consuming significant public resources without success.
