Amicus Acceptance and Relevance: The Distinctive Example of Philip Morris v. Uruguay

• Autores: Farouk El-Hosseny, Ezequiel H. Vetulli
• Localización: Netherlands international law review, ISSN 0165-070X, Vol. 64, Nº. 1, 2017, págs. 73-94
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • In the last decade amicus intervention has become increasingly prevalent in investor-state arbitration. As part of a generalized drive towards transparency, amicus briefs are now routinely submitted in high-profile investor-state arbitrations, which are closely related to public interest issues. Philip Morris v. Uruguay is a notable example of such arbitrations. However, it is often argued that amicus submissions are hardly relevant to investor-state tribunals’ analyses. By first shedding light on the conditions governing the acceptance of amicus briefs, this article looks at how the Philip Morris tribunal admitted such briefs and whether they were at all relevant to the tribunal’s analysis. It thereafter questions the extent to which such relevance may be linked to the tribunal’s findings.

    Keywords