Lawlight said:
palou said:
Again, as I mentionned, corporations can only sue governments for being impartial, discriminatory depending on country of origin. You can ban smoking; you can't ban all European cigarette brands from competing, while allowing your own cigarette companies to prosper. You can put a carbon tax; you can't put a carbon tax on all foreign corporations, while imposing none on your own buisnesses. It's just a way to assure that trade truly stays free.
I'm pretty sure TTIP is going that way, if that makes you happy.
|
That's not true. Corporations can sue for pretty much anything that they deem would affect their bottom line. A good example of what would have happened is how tobacco companies are suing Australia for the plain packaging act. How is that discriminatory? It's not and yet they're still suing Australia. This is underr another trade treaty (AU and HK) but it would be similar.
|
If I remember correctly, that lawsuit failed, as well as a lawsuite by Phillip Morris to stop anti-smoking regulations in Uruguay. The court responsible for this deal has made logical decisions untill now, also making companies pay up for fraudulent lawsuites.
also, the one in australia used a really, really strange clause from a very old trade agreement (can't take possesion of a hk brand or something like that) which simply does not exist in the current deals.
Bet with PeH:
I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.
Bet with WagnerPaiva:
I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.