Woman affirmed right to smoke in own garden

there are certain people who will purosely stand upwind of you if you make it known to them that you do not wish to smell their smoke(even outside). maybe they could set up a time schedule for smoking/non-smoking. i am biased against the smoker, because i do not smoke right now, and i know how rude some can be. even if i smoked, i would try not to offend /pollute. i understand that is her private garden; in the winter she could stand outside and smoke all she wants, their probably would not be anyone downwind at that time of year. can you barbecue/grill outdoors in your yard in sweden?

Personally I hate smoke, and since i dont want to screw up my health i would rather you didnt give me second hand smoke.

I remember a rather famous quip (because i used to use it a lot a while back): Having a smoking area in a restaurant is like having a peeing area in a swimming pool.

BUT that being said, she was smoking in her own yard, outside... with the number of places being closed to smokers, i think its absurd that she couldnt smoke in her own yard and was totally right to appeal. Where did they expect her to smoke then? in the middle of the road?

I support the smoker on this one. Sorry.

Not to mention the barbeque that woke me up. Nobody moans about that but as soon as you stoke up moan groan mumble mutter. Heja Sverige that has nothing better to do.

Of course smoking poses RISK for lunch cancer, etc etc etc.

Didn't Environmental High Court know about it? IMO smoking that disturbs anyone else than the smoking should not be allowed. It is like peeing in front of the public. What do you think?

Well while I hate smoking and support the ban on smoking in public places - I think that it is a step too far to ban someone from smoking in open air in their own garden of the house they own

Smoking should be banned outside, and so should driving cars.

Any smoke-producing device should be banned, including: cigarette/cigar/pipe smoking, all vehicles with internal-combustion engines, barbecues, fireplaces, campfires, and bonfires.

yeah any smoke-producing device should be banned, lets not forget Power Plant they have smoke oh oh and water treatment plants where ethonal is burned. yeah who needs electricity and water?

but on a real note when she was banned from smoking outside for a short time could she smoke inside her house but hang out the window by the garden or would smoking inside your own home which you own be illeagal. it is crazy can not smoke own your own property.

Peeing in your own backyard is a bit different from peeing in public.

Smoking on your own property is your right,

what to you propose next no sex in your backyard????

I cannot believe that it took so long for this to be decided by the courts.

If the neighbour has that much problem with smoke then guess what... she should move to the countryside where the neighbours are too far away to impact her.

Smoking is just killing yourself slowly. ANYONE who smokes is just stupid.

With all the methods available out there right now to quit, it should be mandatory, or at least be subsidised heavily by the government. Create incentives or something.

The sooner Cigarettes are banned from being sold in Sweden, the better.

Aren't we all dying slowly anyway?

The reason that this has taken so long is that the neighbour who objects to smoking (a man actually) is a lawyer and has appealed every court decision that has gone against him.

So the saga of this case has gone something like this:

- 2006 - the man decides to sue the woman for smoking in her garden in Malmö district court Malmö district court decides that this is a matter of environmental protection law and refers the case to the Environmental court - which decided in favour of the smoker that there is no legal reason to ban smoking on private property the man appeals this decision via the High Court to the Higher Environmental Court The Higher Environmental Court refuses his appeal In August 2007 the man appeals again and the case comes back to the Environmental Court - who decides partiallly in the man's favour and declares that woman should not smoke within 9m of the property border In September 2007 the decision is appealed by the woman to the Higher Environmental Court - who finds in favour of the woman and quashes the restriction on her smoking on her own property in November 2007 the man appeals to the Swedish Supreme Court - who refuse to hear his case Then the man lauches a new case in the Environmental Court - wanting to have her banned from smoking again - however the court decision in August 2009 is that she can smoke where she wants on her own property. The man is now considering whether to appeal this decision to either the Higher Environmental Court or the Swedish Supreme Court

Sounds a bit like harassment to me.

I reckon that's what they should write in the Swe-Eng dictionary under 'Gubbjävel'

what if the women was burning some compost or something could she be sued? Also if the women smoked in her house and the house was yellow and was then devalued wouldn't this de value the other houses on the street, could she be sued for this?

Story seems very american to me, no i dont smoke but she has a right to like people have a right to drink. I agree with the lady on this one, but maybe she should buy a fan or something to try and keep the peace

No need for a fan in the garden lol.

I agree with the woman.

As for the comparison between cars and cigs I don't see how they are the same. A car is a vehicle that takes you from a to b. Of course it's bad that they pollute at the same time, but they serve a purpose. Cigs don't serve a purpose at all but is just someone's idea of looking cool.

*awaits comments in abundance*

smoking is cool i mean look at the fonz and this guy http://davidcgarcia.com/wp-content/uploads...ool-300x276.jpg

Oh my god Puffin!

Have you not learnt to use grammar. Your comment of the history of this story really hurt my head.

Learn to use full stops, commas etc.

Ouch!

Should a person wish to smoke, that is their business.

That the neighbor who was offended is a lawyer explains all to me.

The woman would have to fill a barrel with tobbaco and burn the same in order to produce a significant quantity of smoke that would bother a neighbor outdoors.

That she had to appeal to a higher court confirms that the lawyer neighbor had the power to have his ridiculous claim enforced.

He should move to the United States; he would be right at home there among those of his ilk.on Wall Street and those representing their corrupt banks, and he could steal enough money to buy an estate the size of Halland.