Not a victory for smokers’ rights

Sandra-Ann Fowler, the tenant who took her landlord to the Régie du logement over her right to smoke in her apartment (and therefore subject her landlord’s family to traces of second-hand smoke) has won her case.

CTV’s Brian Britt calls it a “victory for smokers’ rights advocates”, and a spokesperson for a smokers’ rights group seems to back him up.

Unfortunately, this simply isn’t true. The ruling stated that because a ban on smoking was not in the lease, Fowler has the right to smoke, even though the application form said smokers were not allowed.

In fact, the ruling apparently suggested that bans on smoking are in fact legal if they are in the lease.

I’d hardly call that a victory. She got off on a technicality, that’s all.

5 thoughts on “Not a victory for smokers’ rights

  1. Tim Logeman

    AS A SMOKER I HAVE MY RIGHTS!! YOU MAY TAX ME AT DRACONIAN RATES HERE IN B.C. BUT I STILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO SMOKE IN A PUB THAT HAS THE PROPER VENTING SYSTEM, ( AS REQUIRED BY WCB WHEN THEY PASSED THEIR LAW ) !! IF YOU STOP PEOPLE FROM BUYING CIGARETTES WHERE WILL THE TAX REVENUES COME FROM TO PAY FOR HEATH CARE? WHAT ABOUT THE OWNERS OF THESE ESTABLISHMENTS? IF I CAN’T SMOKE AND HAVE A BEER THEN I WILL QUIT GOING. MOST PROVINCES HAVE REDUCED THEIR TAXES ON CIGARETTES SINCE THE SMUGGLING FIASCO IN QUEBEC BUT B.C. STILL SAYS THERE IS A SMUGGLING PROBLEM HERE!!! GET REAL. IF YOU DON’T LIKE SECOND HAND SMOKE THEN GO SOMEWHERE ELSE!!!!!!!

    Reply
  2. Mike

    As a smoker, I understand the right to smoke in your own home. Where I currently live, I smoke outdoors out of respect for my roommates, who do not smoke.

    However, where I currently live, the tenents below me smoke enough in their apartment to make mine have the air quality of badly ventilated bar, which I find digusting. It is one thing to have a smoke after supper, but another when when you are constantly breathing in second hand smoke.

    If it affects others, you should not have the right to do it at all.

    Reply
    1. Anderson

      I agree totally. If tenants have the right to smoke in their apartment, then it falls to the landlord to ensure that harmful second hand smoke doesn’t get in to other apartments. If nothing can be done with ventilation, then something has to be done, the landlord could have to pay for moving expenses for people who have to move away for bad air quality. Unfortunately, most buildings just aren’t designed to prevent second hand smoke getting in to other apartments, so longer term solutions which avoid these problems all-together are needed.

      Reply
  3. Niomi

    Sandra-Ann Fowler’s case was dismissed in 2008 and she was ordered to either quit smoking in the leased premises or be evicted.

    http://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2008/04/17/une-fumeuse-deboutee

    > La Cour du Québec a débouté une locataire, Sandra-Ann Fowler, qui voulait fumer dans son logement, malgré l’opposition des propriétaires de l’immeuble. La fumeuse, une résidente de Montréal, avait d’abord eu gain de cause devant la Régie du logement.

    > Selon le tribunal, la locataire a rempli un document lui interdisant de fumer et doit respecter la condition imposée par les propriétaires même si elle n’est pas inscrite dans le bail.

    > Les propriétaires habitent le même immeuble que madame Fowler et ce sont eux qui ont constaté qu’elle fumait chez elle.

    Reply

Leave a Reply