Philip Morris 'abused rights' seeking to sue Australia: Court
In 2012, Australia became the first country to mandate that cigarettes must be sold in plain packages, in a bid to reduce smoking rates. This initiative has since been followed by other nations including France and Britain.
An international tribunal on Monday finally unveiled a secret ruling confirming it had rejected a bid by tobacco giant Philip Morris to sue Australia over its plain packaging laws, calling the attempt "an abuse of rights".
In its heavily-redacted 186-page ruling dating from December 17, 2015, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) said it had no jurisdiction over the case brought by Philip Morris.
In 2012, Australia became the first country to mandate that cigarettes must be sold in plain packages, in a bid to reduce smoking rates. This initiative has since been followed by other nations including France and Britain.
But big tobacco firms including Philip Morris have launched legal challenges against such laws, arguing the new rules impinge on their trademark intellectual property.
Philip Morris, manufacturers of some of the world`s most recognisable brands, including Marlboro, lodged the challenge with the arbitration court based in The Hague in 2011 after the plain-packaging legislation was first passed, using a 1993 trade deal between Australia and Hong Kong that included foreign investment protections.
But the PCA found in its animous ruling that "the main and determinative, if not sole, reason" for a restructuring of the company as far back as 2005 was to enable it "to bring a claim under the treaty, using an entity from Hong Kong" after it received ample warnings that such legislation was being considered.
"The record indeed shows that the principal, if not sole, purpose of the restructuring was to gain protection under the treaty in respect of the very measures that form the subject matter of the present arbitration," the court ruled.
"The tribunal cannot but conclude that the initiation of this arbitration constitutes an abuse of rights," the court added.
The court therefore found that Philip Morris`s claims were "inadmissible" and it was "precluded from exercising jurisdiction over this dispute."
The ruling came after a closed-door hearing held in Singapore in February 2015.
Canberra had welcomed the decision saying "plain packaging is a legitimate public health measure."
Get Latest Business News, Stock Market Updates and Videos; Check your tax outgo through Income Tax Calculator and save money through our Personal Finance coverage. Check Business Breaking News Live on Zee Business Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe on YouTube.
RECOMMENDED STORIES
Rs 3,500 Monthly SIP for 35 years vs Rs 35,000 Monthly SIP for 16 Years: Which can give you higher corpus in long term? See calculations
SBI 444-day FD vs PNB 400-day FD: Here's what general and senior citizens will get in maturity on Rs 3.5 lakh and 7 lakh investments in special FDs?
SCSS vs FD: Which guaranteed return scheme will give you more quarterly income on Rs 20,00,000 investment?
Looking for short term investment ideas? Analysts suggest buying these 2 stocks for potential gain; check targets
Power of Compounding: How long it will take to build Rs 5 crore corpus with Rs 5,000, Rs 10,000 and Rs 15,000 monthly investments?
11:18 AM IST