Even Plane for Plain Packaging: Does the High Court Decision Change the Landscape of the International Disputes?

ACICA News March 2013

7 Pages Posted: 15 Apr 2013

See all articles by Kyle D. Dickson-Smith

Kyle D. Dickson-Smith

The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators; University of Melbourne

Date Written: March 30, 2013

Abstract

This article provides a detailed analysis of the ramifications under international law arising from High Court constitutional challenge of JT International SA v. Commonwealth of Australia [2012] HCA 43. That case analysed whether the proposed plain packaging laws constituted an "acquisition" under section 51(xxxi) of the Australian Constitution. This paper discussed whether that finding will have an impact on the outstanding Philip Morris investor-state arbitration under the Australia-Hong Kong Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT), and the WTO proceedings on plain packaging initiated against Australia. The article finally addresses the status of the Trans Pacific Partnership negotiations, particularly Japan's announcement of seeking entry to the negotiations.

Keywords: Philip Morris v. Australia, Philip Morris v Uruguay, WTO, Plain Packaging, TRIPS Agreement, TBT Agreement, Trans Pacific Partnership, Expropriation, WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, Australia-Hong Kong Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT), Australian Constitution

JEL Classification: F21, K33

Suggested Citation

Dickson-Smith, Kyle D., Even Plane for Plain Packaging: Does the High Court Decision Change the Landscape of the International Disputes? (March 30, 2013). ACICA News March 2013. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2243971

Kyle D. Dickson-Smith (Contact Author)

The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators ( email )

12 Bloomsbury Square
London, WC1A 2LP
United Kingdom

University of Melbourne ( email )

185 Pelham Street
Carlton, Victoria 3053
Australia

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
153
rank
184,273
Abstract Views
839
PlumX Metrics