Eli Lilly v Canada: the uncomfortable liaison between intellectual property and international investment law

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Diependaele ◽  
Julian Cockbain ◽  
Sigrid Sterckx
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Law

The protection if intellectual property rights under international investment law

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (17) ◽  
pp. 238-240
Author(s):  
Juan Manuel Rivero Godoy
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
International Conflict ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Present Book ◽  
Investment Law

The present book is a masterpiece on both international arbitration and intellectual property features where the authors have achieved to address the attention to substantial and procedural elements when an international conflict arises between different actors such as states, companies, individuals, etc.

scholarly journals Chorzów Factory – intellectual property and the continuity of international law in investor-state dispute settlement

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Sean Morris
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Fair Compensation ◽  
Investment Law

One of the most important cases in the jurisprudence of international law – Chorzów Factory – has a hidden secret, so much so that, even when in plain sight, legal post-mortems of the case fail to mention this well-kept secret. Chorzów Factory was about intellectual property rights, specifically patents and trade secrets, and this narrative has never been fully addressed. When the developments in international investment law and arbitration are fully considered it is worth looking back at Chorzów Factory to associate it with new streams of contemporary investor-state disputes that include issues such as intellectual property rights. Because Chorzów Factory has established the full reparation standard for unlawful expropriation, the standard has enabled a continuity of international law and underscores its importance for contemporary investment arbitration. However, the intellectual property narrative of Chorzów Factory has been neglected, and, in this article, I want to develop the intellectual property narrative of Chorzów Factory and to demonstrate the nexus between fair compensation, intellectual property rights and the continuity of international law.

scholarly journals The Private Law Critique of International Investment Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Arato
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Legal Institutions ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Do So

AbstractThis Article argues that investment treaties subtly constrain how nations organize their internal systems of private law, including laws of property, contracts, corporations, and intellectual property. Problematically, the treaties do so on a one-size-fits-all basis, disregarding the wide variation in values reflected in these domestic legal institutions. Investor-state dispute settlement exacerbates this tension, further distorting national private law arrangements. This hidden aspect of the system produces inefficiency, unfairness, and distributional inequities that have eluded the regime's critics and apologists alike.

The Unified Patent Court and the frustrated promise of IP protection: Investors’ claims in (post-)Brexit Britain

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-104
Author(s):  
Riccardo Vecellio Segate
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
Unified Patent Court ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
The Eu

Tensions between the EU’s legal order and the international investment law regime are not exclusive to the Brexit era, but they certainly gained momentum in the aftermath of this referendum. By incautiously declaring that the UK will remain a party to the Unified Patent System regardless of Brexit, the British government arguably shaped (il)legitimate expectations on the part of investors who aimed at exploiting their intellectual property rights in the UK while benefitting from the judicial protection of the forthcoming Unified Patent Court as much as of the European institutions (and market) as a whole. Indeed, not only the System itself will undergo a process of major rebalancing after London’s departure from the EU, but more importantly, the UK will most probably be unable to retain its membership in the System after the actual delivery of Brexit. These complications trigger a wide spectrum of fundamental dilemmas investing the definition and scope of concepts such as unilateral declaration, indirect expropriation, reasonable expectation, estoppel, and public policy exception, under both EU law and international investment law. It is therefore essential to explore these intersections as to anticipate possible scenarios in the event of both domestic court and international arbitral claims lodged by patent investors pre- and post-Brexit, having due regard for competition concerns on the side of the EU, yet referring to recent Canadian case law which opened the gate to investor-State claims in the field of intellectual property.

scholarly journals Chorzów Factory – intellectual property and the continuity of international law in investor-state dispute settlement

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-199
Author(s):  
P Sean Morris
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Fair Compensation ◽  
Investment Law

One of the most important cases in the jurisprudence of international law – Chorzów Factory – has a hidden secret, so much so that, even when in plain sight, legal post-mortems of the case fail to mention this well-kept secret. Chorzów Factory was about intellectual property rights, specifically patents and trade secrets, and this narrative has never been fully addressed. When the developments in international investment law and arbitration are fully considered it is worth looking back at Chorzów Factory to associate it with new streams of contemporary investor-state disputes that include issues such as intellectual property rights. Because Chorzów Factory has established the full reparation standard for unlawful expropriation, the standard has enabled a continuity of international law and underscores its importance for contemporary investment arbitration. However, the intellectual property narrative of Chorzów Factory has been neglected, and, in this article, I want to develop the intellectual property narrative of Chorzów Factory and to demonstrate the nexus between fair compensation, intellectual property rights and the continuity of international law.

Intellectual Property and International Investment Agreements

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Foreign Investor ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Ip Protection ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Agreements

This chapter examines selected issues on the scope of intellectual property (IP) protection under international investment law and contrasts this with the approach of the international IP system. It first reviews the extent to which IP amounts to a protected investment. The chapter then analyses the operation of national treatment and most favoured nation (MFN) in international investment agreements (IIAs) and international IP treaties. Some of the absolute standards of treatment owed by a host state to a foreign investor under most IIAs are examined in their application to IP rights. Finally, this chapter scrutinises the extent to which obligations from the international IP system can be subject to investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document