Abstract
In December last year the long-running international investment arbitration between multinational tobacco corporation Philip Morris and Australia ended when the tribunal declined a Philip Morris' claim. The dispute was initiated by a foreign investor after Australia introduced strict anti-tobacco measures in 2011.
Naturally, the claim became very controversial and soon it was being used as a prime example of an investor abusing an international treaty by opponents of investment protection and particularly the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in international investment and trade agreements such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership - TTIP. This article focuses not only on an analysis of this particular case, but it tries to put the dispute into broader context of development of Australia's investment policy as well as the system of international investment law.