WTO appoints plain pack panelists
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

WTO appoints plain pack panelists

World Trade Organization Director-General Roberto Azevêdo this week appointed three panelists to consider the legality of Australia’s law requiring plain packaging for tobacco products

The panel will be chaired by Alexander Erwin of South Africa. The other two members are François Dessemonted of Switzerland and Billie Miller of Barbados. The parties will make written and oral representations to the panel, which must finalize its report within six months.

The panelists will decide whether they think Australia’s tobacco plain packaging laws breach the trade organization’s rules before the end of the year.

Five complaints have been brought by Ukraine, Indonesia, Cuba, Dominican Republic and Honduras against Australia. The six countries were unable to agree on who should examine the disputes. Under a harmonized procedure, the five complaints will be considered by the same three panelists.

Although each complaint targets Australia’s plain packaging rules, they are not exactly the same. Ukraine’s deals with “certain measures concerning trademarks and other plain packaging requirements applicable to tobacco products and packaging” while the rest also invoke the WTO’s rules on geographical indications.

The appointments come shortly after Australia complained that the unresolved trade row was having a chilling effect on other countries that are considering introducing similar constraints on the way that tobacco is packaged. Ukraine requested consultations with Australia under WTO procedures more than two years ago.

New Zealand has already said that it plans to follow Australia’s lead, and the UK government said last month it will introduce plain packaging following a review.

If the panel decides that plain packaging does breach WTO trade rules, it will recommend how the measure should be changed. Its report becomes the Dispute Settlement Body’s ruling or recommendation within 60 days unless a consensus rejects it. If a party appeals, the appeal will be heard by three members of the WTO’s permanent seven-member Appellate Body. It has up to 90 days to uphold, modify or reverse the panel’s legal findings and conclusions. The Dispute Settlement Body has to accept or reject the appeals report within 30 days – and rejection is only possible by consensus.

Plain packaging will be discussed tomorrow in the session CM02 Plain Packaging: Who Will It Affect Next? from 10:15 am to 11:30 am.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Rob Stien, chief communications and public policy officer at InterDigital, says the EU has forgotten innovators while trying to resolve an issue that doesn’t exist
As Australia’s Qantm IP leans towards being acquired by a private equity company, sources discuss what it could mean for IP firms
Law firms that are conscious of their role in society are more likely to win work, according to a survey of over 23,000 in-house professionals
Pham Nghiem Xuan Bac, managing partner of Vision & Associates, discusses opportunities created by the US-China rift as well as profitability issues facing IP practices
Douglas Leite and two of his colleagues were intrigued by Bhering Advogados’s mission to grow its patent litigation practice
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP practitioner about their life and career
Counsel explain how pricing flexibility, patent agents and being business partners can help them maintain profitable patent prosecution practices
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Speakers at an INTA event weighed in on why firms should create AI use policies and how they stay on top of the latest developments
The England and Wales Court of Appeal backed Lidl in its trademark dispute with Tesco, but we should pay more attention to how we rule on first-instance decisions
Gift this article