By Tiffany Goodwein

Armstrong man files suit against vaping giant Juul

Oct 1, 2019 | 3:53 PM

Two men, one of which is from Armstrong B.C., have launched a lawsuit against vaping giant Juul.

In a 14-page notice of civil claim filed in Supreme Court in Vancouver, Jaycen Stephens of Armstrong and another plaintiff Owen Mann-Campbell allege the company failed to properly disclose the risk of e-cigarettes to consumers, and instead used deceptive marking techniques to make e-cigarettes seem safer than smoking.

Court documents state the 19-year-old Armstrong man began smoking e-cigarettes in 2018 and “immediately after” using the products, began experiencing shortness of breath, chronic bronchitis, chest pain, coughing, anxiety, pneumonia, an increased addiction to nicotine and other symptoms.

Stephens claims the symptoms caused him pain and suffering, a loss of opportunity to earn income, loss of enjoyment of life, and resulted in permanent physical disability.

Mann-Campbell claims he experienced similar symptoms “immediately after” using Juul e-cigarettes. He also claimed the usage led to depression and weight loss.

Charger rollout

Phased approach planned for EV chargers at Vernon ALC

22h ago

Secondary Dwellings

Coldstream considering more housing on agricultural lands

Apr 24, 2026

Wildfire Risks

Okanagan's Fire Danger Rating already up to Moderate

Apr 23, 2026

In 2019, both their family doctors advised them that the symptoms were likely caused from vaping use.

“The Plaintiff Jaycen would not have purchased and/or used Juul e-cigarettes had he been provided with accurate information and/or warnings with respect to the possible health complications from vaping,” the notice of civil claim states.

Court documents allege the company Juul Labs Canada Ltd, and Juul Labs Inc. used statements like “no tar. No smoke. No ash” and wording to suggest that the products are “totally safe” and that smokers should “make the switch,” in order to market their products to minors.

The claim alleges the company knew or ought to have known that the vaping products contained propylene, glycol, glycerine and benzoic acid—toxins that could result in injury including pulmonary disease.

The two plaintiffs are seeking general damages, special damages, punitive damages, relief pursuant to the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act, the recovery of health case costs and other relief determined by the court.

The allegations contained in the statement of claim have not been tested before the courts.

by Tiffany Goodwein

View Comments