ICSID case ARB/10/7 (Decision)
ICSID · Investment (ICSID and treaty) · International (investor-state) · March 24, 2015
Why it matters
Philip Morris Brands Sàrl, Philip Morris Products S.A. and Abal Hermanos S.A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, an investment-treaty arbitration administered by ICSID (case no. ARB/10/7), in which a foreign investor brought claims against a state under an investment treaty. In the outcome, the tribunal rendered its award. For a student, it is a worked example of investor-state dispute settlement: how an ICSID tribunal weighs a state's right to regulate against the treaty protections owed to foreign investors.
Summary
Philip Morris Brands Sàrl, Philip Morris Products S.A. and Abal Hermanos S.A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay: an ICSID decision (ARB/10/7). In the outcome, the tribunal rendered its award. The tribunal's full reasoning is set out in the original.
The detail
Parties: Philip Morris Brands Sàrl, Philip Morris Products S.A. and Abal Hermanos S.A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay
Case number: ICSID Case No. ARB/10/7
Outcome: Decision in case ARB/10/7. See the original for the disposition and any quantum.
Applicable law: ICSID Convention and Arbitration Rules; the applicable investment treaty.
Issues in play: A foreign investor's treaty protections against a sovereign state's right to regulate.
Read the full decision at ICSID case database ↗
Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.