Selling a tobacco product labelled or otherwise described as suitable for chewing or other oral use — definition of tobacco product — IQOS — meaning of "any other oral use" — statutory interpretation — ejusdem generis rule — judge alone trial — verdict — Smoke-free Environments Act 1990, s 29. The defendant was charged with selling a tobacco product labelled or otherwise described as suitable for chewing or any other oral use other than smoking. The product was a heated device that produced an aerosol instead of smoke. The court found that the product did not fall within the ambit of s 29 of the Smoke-free Environments Act taking into account: the class of thing described in the section being a tobacco product used for chewing or an activity similar to chewing; the statutory history including text printed alongside the section in the Statute; the explanatory note accompanying the Bill; a quote from the Minister of Health when the Bill was introduced; and the purposes of the Act. The court found that the product was not caught within the ambit of s 29 (2) of the Act and the charge was dismissed. Judgment Date: 12 March 2018.