Philip Morris Brands Sàrl, Philip Morris Products S.A. and Abal Hermanos S.A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/7 (formerly FTR Holding SA, Philip Morris Products S.A. and Abal Hermanos S.A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay), Respondent's Memorial on Jurisdiction (September 24, 2011)
1. Pursuant to paragraph 13 of the Agreement of the Parties on Procedural Matters,
Respondent the Oriental Republic of Uruguay (“Uruguay”) respectfully submits this Memorial objecting to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
2. The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction for at least two reasons:
Claimants Philip Morris Brands Sàrl,1 Philip Morris Products S.A., and Abal Hermanos S.A. have failed to comply with the domestic litigation requirement set forth in Article 10(2) of the Treaty between the Swiss Confederation and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay on the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection on Investments, including the Protocol thereto (the “BIT” or “Treaty”).2 Because this requirement is a precondition to jurisdiction, Claimants’ failure to satisfy it means the Tribunal has no power to hear this case; and
Article 2 of the BIT specifically excludes measures adopted for reasons of public health from the scope of the protections afforded to investors. As such, it removes disputes relating to public health measures from the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. Since the measures Claimants attack were indisputably taken for purposes of mitigating the universally-recognized harms to public health caused by the consumption of tobacco products, jurisdiction is absent.