The US legal battle Tobacco economics Smoking goes global Cigarette health file Timeline: the tobacco war

The High Court ruling comes as a blow to the government, which has placed the advertising ban at the centre of its public health policy.

The government had wanted to implement the European Tobacco Advertising Directive, even though the measure was still being challenged in the European Court of Justice.

The BBC's Rory Cellan Jones: "Tobacco firms could face another battle in Scotland"

Imperial, Gallagher, Rothmans UK and British American Tobacco - supported by the Tobacco Manufacturers' Association - said the government was jumping the gun and sought a court order to prevent them going any further.

Waiting period

Paul Sadler of Imperial Tobacco explains the grounds for taking court action

On Friday, the High Court in London agreed and Mr Justice Turner ruled that the "balance of convenience" was in favour of maintaining the present position until the European Court made its ruling.

Speaking after the ruling, Paul Sadler of Imperial Tobacco said: "We are pleased that the court has ruled in our favour.

"It is a pity that we had to take this action.

Public Health Minister Yvette Cooper: Government will introduce advertising ban

"We have co-operated fully for many years, in operating a system of voluntary agreements, and hope that effective dialogue between manufacturers and government can now be reinstated."

The tobacco companies had said that the UK does not have to implement the ban until July 2001, and so should wait until the European Court made its ruling.

'Huge impact'

The directive as it stands would have a huge impact on all those involved in the tobacco trade, from manufacturers to local shop owners, and that was why the companies were challenging it in Europe, they said.

The government wants to discourage smoking

But the Department of Health and Department of Trade and Industry said the ban must be introduced as soon as possible in the interests of public health.

However, Mr Justice Turner said it was "strongly arguable" that the tobacco companies would succeed in their European challenge, and so the government should not introduce any regulations until then.

He said companies and individuals who were engaging in "a lawful, if from the point of view of public health, undesirable trade" may suffer irrecoverable losses were the UK to introduce legislation that eventually turned out to have no legal validity.

Individuals may even lose their jobs, he said.

Health considerations

The government had argued that it was both in the national interest and in accordance with its manifesto pledges to implement the directive at a time of its choosing.

But Mr Justice Turner said this was no answer in law, and although he recognised the health benefits of the ban, the effect of a delay was unlikely to be significant.

The European case is expected to reach its conclusion some time towards the end of next year.

Dr Liam Fox: "Sign of incompetence"

The government - which had hoped to introduce the measures on 10 December - was granted leave to launch an urgent appeal.

Health Secretary Alan Milburn said: "I am appalled that the tobacco companies are trying to undermine a clear manifesto commitment for which there is such widespread public support."

However, shadow health secretary Dr Liam Fox said: "(The) court ruling calls into question once again the competence of this Labour government.