The International Law Gaze: The ICSID Award in Philip Morris v Uruguay and the Near End of the “Aesthetic Experience”.

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorAlvarez-Jimenez, Albertoen_NZ
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-19T21:41:58Z
dc.date.available2017-02-01en_NZ
dc.date.available2017-04-19T21:41:58Z
dc.date.issued2017en_NZ
dc.description.abstractIt was the large economic value of tobacco’s “aesthetic experience” that Philip Morris (PM) sought to preserve in its litigation against Uruguay before an international tribunal operating under the jurisdiction of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). There, PM claimed that Uruguay was in violation of the Agreement between the Swiss Confederation and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay on the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments, dated October 7, 1988 (the BIT). The reason? Uruguay’s decision to enact tobacco control measures, in particular, its single presentation requirement (SPR) prohibiting tobacco manufacturers from selling more than one variant of cigarette per brand family and the increase in the size of health warnings included on cigarette packets from 50% to 80% of the surface of the front and the back (80/80 Regulation). As a result, manufacturers had only 20% of the room on cigarette packs for trademarks, logos, and other information.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.citationAlvarez-Jimenez, A. (2017). The International Law Gaze: The ICSID Award in Philip Morris v Uruguay and the Near End of the ‘Aesthetic Experience’. New Zealand Law Journal, 2017 February(2), 29–33.en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10289/11004
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherLexisNexis
dc.relation.isPartOfNew Zealand Law Journal
dc.relation.urihttp://www.lexisnexis.co.nz/en-nz/products/new-zealand-law-journal.page
dc.rightsThis is an author’s accepted version of an article published in the New Zealand Law Journal [2017] NZLJ 29, published by LexisNexis.
dc.titleThe International Law Gaze: The ICSID Award in Philip Morris v Uruguay and the Near End of the “Aesthetic Experience”.en_NZ
dc.typeJournal Article
pubs.begin-page29
pubs.elements-id193471
pubs.end-page33
pubs.issue2
pubs.organisational-group/Waikato
pubs.organisational-group/Waikato/2018 PBRF
pubs.organisational-group/Waikato/FLAW
pubs.organisational-group/Waikato/FLAW/2018 PBRF - FLAW
pubs.volume2017 February
uow.verification.statusunverified
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Philip Morris v Uruguay.A.Alvarez.Jimenez.pdf
Size:
199.13 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Accepted version
Thumbnail Image
Name: Philip Morris v Uruguay.A.Alvarez.Jimenez.pdf
Size: 199.13 KB
Kind: Adobe PDF
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
Research Commons Deposit Agreement 2017.pdf
Size:
188.11 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Name: Research Commons Deposit Agreement 2017.pdf
Size: 188.11 KB
Kind: Adobe PDF
Collections
Law Papers