International arbitration: the jurisdictional award inPhilip Morris v Uruguay, and enforcement of arbitration awards

Abstract

In Philip Morris v Uruguay , the claimants have claimed damages for alleged breaches of the Switzerland-Uruguay bilateral investment treaty in relation to packaging regulations Uruguay has implemented for tobacco products. These include certain plain packaging rules and a requirement to include prominent health warnings on tobacco products. In its 2nd July 2013 decision, the tribunal found jurisdiction to hear the dispute. The decision provides useful guidance on a number of important jurisdictional issues such as the application of certain pre-conditions to arbitration and the interpretation of “investment” in light of political motives. This case note article also is a consideration of Harry Matovu QC’s opinion on the recognition and enforcement of awards under the OHADA Arbitration regime for the common law principles for analysis of commercial dispute resolution issues in relation to the international law in Africa as an example. Arbitration has recently become one of the preferred methods for resolving international commercial disputes in South America and South Africa.