2012年澳大利亚开始实施《烟草简易包装法案》，禁止在烟草产品的零售包装上使用商标，并采取统一简易包装。菲利普莫里斯烟草公司等依据双边投资条约提起仲裁，并游说乌克兰等向WTO提起争端。简易包装措施是否构成国际投资协定下的“间接征收”面临投资者可合理预见该烟草商标管制行为，政府并没有给予特定保护的确认的障碍。《TRIPS协定》第20条禁止成员方对商标的使用施加不合理干扰的特殊要求，简易包装措施使烟草产品在销售时无法发挥商标识别商品来源、防止混淆的功能，可能构成不合理的干扰。另外，《TBT协定》第2．2条要求为实现公共健康目的的技术法规不产生不必要的贸易限制，简易包装措施亦有可能被认为欠缺科学依据，超出了必要贸易限制性而被认定为不符合《TBT协定》的要求。%The Tobacco Plain Packaging Act executed by Australia in 2012 forbids the use of trademark on the retail packages of tobacco.The tobacco companies resorted to investor-state arbitration and lobbied WTO member such as Ukraine to bring a dispute to WTO.The plain packaging measure might be deemed as indirect appropriation of investment, while faced the uncertainty that the investor might have foreseen the measure and that the state did not provide the assurance for such protection.Article 20 of TRIPS forbids the WTO members to lay unjustifiable special requirements on the use of trademarks.The plain pack-aging measure wil be probably seen as an unjustifiable requirement because it re-moves the trademark's basic function of identifying the origin.Furthermore, Arti-cle 2.2 of TBT requires the technical regulation pursuing public health shal not be more trade restrictive than necessary.The plain packaging measure might run afoul of Article 2.2 of TBT as wel .
展开▼
