Abstract
Phillip Morris v. Uruguay and Eli Lilly v. Canada are two international investor-state cases that may reveal an emerging trend in international investment law: if a State creates laws that reduce the financial value of an investor’s domestic IP rights, then the investor might use the State’s international IP obligations against it in order to obtain compensation for the lost value of the IP or even force the State to consider reversing course.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
