The tendency of the jurisprudence and doctrine on the nature of the liability for damages sustained by the consumer of tobacco is incoherent and vague, since sometimes the victim is burdened by the harshest burden of proof based on fault, other times is helped by the recognition of strict liability of manufacturers.
In the latter case, the protection of victim is undoubtedly more effective, because the damages are recognized regardless of the evidence of the subjective element of the infringement and, in particular, of the cigarette manufacturer's fault. Reaching this result has not been a easy route, and different legal systems have reacted with different legal arguments. In Italy the Supreme Court has recently put a full stop at the question, qualifying as "dangerous" the activity of production and trade of tobacco and applying, therefore, the rules devoted to govern this field which are devote to the liability of activities dangerous per se like mining or for the means used, like electricity. But this legal fiction is not always feasible.European Business Law Review