May 01, 2018 Landslide Digital Feature

Investment Treaties and Intellectual Property: Eli Lilly v. Canada and Philip Morris v. Uruguay

By H. Jared Doster and Daniel J. Gervais

©2018. Published in Landslide, Vol. 10, No. 5, May/June 2018, by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association or the copyright holder.

Philip 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 intellectual property (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.

Premium Content For:
  • Intellectual Property Law Section
Join - Now