Philip Morris v. Uruguay
| Philip Morris v. Uruguay | |
|---|---|
Office ICSID in 2006.
|
|
| Court | ICSID |
| Full case name | ARB/10/7. Philip Morris Brand Sàrl (Switzerland), Philip Morris Products S.A. (Switzerland) v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay |
| Decided | 8 July de 2016 (6 years old) |
| Transcript(s) | Sentence links |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Gary Born, James Crawford, Piero Bernardini |
| Keywords | |
| Cigarettes, intellectual property, health | |
The Philip Morris v. Uruguay case (Spanish: Caso Philip Morris contra Uruguay) started on 19 February 2010, when the multinational tobacco company Philip Morris International filed a complaint against Uruguay. The company complains that Uruguay's anti-smoking legislation devalues its cigarette trademarks and investments in the country and is suing Uruguay for compensation under the bilateral investment treaty between Switzerland and Uruguay. (Philip Morris is headquartered in Lausanne.)
The treaty provides that disputes are settled by binding arbitration before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).
Uruguay had received accolades from the World Health Organization and from anti-smoking activists for its anti-smoking campaign.
On 8 July 2016, after 6 years, the ICSID ruled in favor of Uruguay, forcing the demandant to pay the expenses of the defendants and the court.
The history of tobacco companies in Uruguay begins with the creation of the Compañía Industrial de Tabacos Monte Paz S.A., founded in 1880. Represented the brands: Nevada, Coronado and California, among others. In 1945 the company Abal Hermanos S.A. appeared as representative of the brands: Marlboro, Benson & Hedges, Silver Mint, Philip Morris, Casino, Next and L&M. The British American Tobacco (BAT) was selling tobacco as well as cigarettes. He retired from Uruguay on 21 April 2010, when he represented brands: Kent, Kool, Lucky Strike and Pall Mall.
...
Wikipedia