Magnifier Search

Yaung Chi Oo Trading v. Myanmar

Type of decisionAward
Date of decision31 March 2003
Tribunal
Sompong Sucharitkul (President)
Francis Delon
James R. Crawford
Legal instrumentASEAN Agreement for the Promotion and Protection of Investments
Further information

Statements from this decision

You are currently viewing the statements in their context. To view them in a list, click here.
If a practice exists between a treaty's parties that treaties are amended only by later treaties explicitly referring to the earlier one, one cannot presume that the parties would tacitly amend or extend an earlier treaty, at least if the later treaty is capable of operating independently
If a practice exists between a treaty's parties that treaties are amended only by later treaties explicitly referring to the earlier one, one cannot presume that the parties would tacitly amend or extend an earlier treaty, at least if the later treaty is capable of operating independently
If an IIT requires approval and registration of the investment, the approval under a party's general national law is sufficient unless the party makes it clear to potential investors that separate procedures exist
Even if certain management activities of a company in its country of incorporation only serve to fulfil that country's minimum legal requirements, the very same management activity can still be an indication of effective management of the company in that country as required by an IIT
If the IIT requires both incorporation and effective management in one country, both requirements have to be met regardless of the country's local law
A requirement of effective management of the investing company at the place of incorporation avoids "protection shopping"
There is a presumption that effective management, once established, is not readily lost
A claimant does not need to exhaust local remedies, if the IIT does not provide otherwise
A state's consent to arbitration is expressed in the IIT
If a practice exists between a treaty's parties that treaties are amended only by later treaties explicitly referring to the earlier one, one cannot presume that the parties would tacitly amend or extend an earlier treaty, at least if the later treaty is capable of operating independently

Feedback

Above you will find 8 statement(s) from this decision. Please note that when viewing the statements in their context, the same statement may appear multiple times if it is relevant for more than one topic. Did we miss something? Feel free to send us your suggestions!