PM与乌拉圭仲裁案评析与启示

发布时间：2018-06-25 20:02

本文选题：烟草控制措施 + 商标权　；参考：《山西大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：2003年5月21日,在第56届世界卫生大会上,其192个成员一致通过了《烟草控制框架公约》(以下简称FCTC),2005年2月27日,FCTC正式生效。FCTC为了避免或减少烟草消费和接触烟草烟雾对全世界健康、社会、经济和环境造成的破坏性后果,致力于为国际卫生合作提供法律平台,呼吁国际社会开展尽可能广泛的国际合作。乌拉圭是南美洲第一个加入FCTC的国家,并积极参与烟草控制技术合作和交流,正确履行FCTC所规定的义务,但也由此引发了有关商标权和公共健康保护之间的争议和诉讼。本文以菲利普·莫里斯烟草公司与乌拉圭仲裁案为基础,通过分析案件争议焦点,从法律角度探析商标权和公共健康保护之间的冲突和平衡,并为主权国家保护公共健康,减少或避免相关争端提出建议。正文一共分为三个部分。第一部分介绍菲利普·莫里斯与乌拉圭仲裁案基本情况,2010年3月26日,菲利普·莫里斯烟草公司向国际投资争端解决中心提起仲裁请求,称乌拉圭政府实施的两项烟草措施——单一外观要求和80/80规则违反了《瑞士-乌拉圭促进与保护投资协议》(简称瑞士-乌拉圭BIT),侵犯其商标权。2016年7月8日,ICSID公布了对这件仲裁案的裁决书。仲裁庭驳回了申请人的仲裁请求,并且裁决其赔偿乌拉圭政府七百万美元。第二部分总结并分析了菲利普·莫里斯与乌拉圭仲裁案争议焦点,主要包括:第一,乌拉圭烟草控制措施是否构成对投资的间接征收;第二,是否违反公平和公正待遇;第三,是否违反保护伞条款。笔者通过对比争端双方观点,分析仲裁庭裁决理由,并结合相关案例,分析投资者的诉讼请求是否合理,探究冲突根源,为下文解决商标权和公共健康冲突奠定基础。第三部分提出解决商标权和公共健康冲突的途径,一方面,协调商标权和公共健康保护的价值冲突;另一方面,站在东道国角度上提出争端防范措施,首先,要做好国际仲裁和国内救济制度的衔接与协调;第二,东道国在订立投资条约时要明确立场,细化投资条约内容;最后,完善自身国内立法,尽量避免和减少引发投资者诉讼。
[Abstract]:On 21 May 2003, at the 56th World Health Assembly, Its 192 members unanimously adopted the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (hereinafter referred to as FCTC). On February 27, 2005, FCTC came into force. The devastating economic and environmental consequences are committed to providing a legal platform for international health cooperation and call for the widest possible international cooperation. Uruguay is the first country in South America to join the FCTC, and actively participates in the technical cooperation and exchange of tobacco control, and correctly fulfils the obligations stipulated by the FCTC, but it also leads to disputes and lawsuits between trademark rights and public health protection. Based on the arbitration case between Philip Morris Tobacco Company and Uruguay, this paper, by analyzing the dispute focus of the case, analyzes the conflict and balance between trademark rights and public health protection from the legal point of view, and protects public health for the sovereign state. Make suggestions to reduce or avoid related disputes. The text is divided into three parts. Part I presents the basics of the Philip Morris and Uruguay arbitration case. On 26 March 2010, Philip Morris Tobacco filed a request for arbitration with the International Centre for the settlement of Investment disputes, The two tobacco measures implemented by the Uruguayan government-the single appearance requirement and the 80 / 80 rule-violate the Swiss-Uruguay Agreement for the Promotion and Protection of Investment (Swiss-Uruguay bit) and violate its trademark rights. July 8, 2016 ICSID A ruling on the arbitration case was distributed. The tribunal rejected the applicant's arbitration claim and awarded it $7 million to the Uruguayan government. The second part summarizes and analyzes the dispute focus in the arbitration case between Philip Morris and Uruguay, mainly including: first, whether Uruguay tobacco control measures constitute an indirect levy on investment; second, whether it violates fair and just treatment; third, Whether or not the umbrella clause is violated. By comparing the viewpoints of the two parties to the dispute, the author analyzes the reasons of the arbitral tribunal ruling, and combining with the relevant cases, analyzes whether the investor's litigation request is reasonable or not, explores the root causes of the conflict, and lays the foundation for resolving the trademark right and the public health conflict below. The third part proposes the way to solve the conflict between trademark right and public health. On the one hand, it coordinates the value conflict between trademark right and public health protection; on the other hand, it puts forward the dispute prevention measures from the point of view of the host country. To do a good job of international arbitration and domestic relief system convergence and coordination; second when the host country to conclude investment treaties to clarify the position of the investment treaties; finally improve their own domestic legislation to avoid and reduce the initiation of investor litigation.
【学位授予单位】：山西大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D997.4

【参考文献】