Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte. Ltd. v. Government of the Union of Myanmar, ASEAN I.D. Case No. ARB/01/1
ASEAN Arbitral Tribunal · Investment (ICSID and treaty) · Myanmar · 31 Mar 2003
Why it matters
This is the first ASEAN investment arbitration award. It clarifies the scope of the 1987 ASEAN Agreement, particularly the requirements for investment approval and registration, and the relationship between successive ASEAN investment treaties. The Tribunal's strict interpretation of jurisdictional requirements set a precedent for subsequent ASEAN investor-state disputes.
Summary
Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte. Ltd. (YCO), a Singapore company, entered into a joint venture with Myanmar state entities in 1993 to operate a brewery. The joint venture was successful until 1997-1998, when YCO alleged that Myanmar authorities seized the brewery and froze accounts. After the joint venture expired and was wound up, YCO initiated arbitration under the 1987 ASEAN Agreement. Myanmar objected to jurisdiction, arguing that the investment was not approved and registered under the Agreement, and that YCO was not effectively managed from Singapore. The Tribunal agreed, finding that the investment did not meet the requirements of Article II of the 1987 Agreement because it was not specifically approved and registered for the purposes of the Agreement after Myanmar acceded. The Tribunal also rejected YCO's arguments based on the 1998 Framework Agreement and MFN clause. The award is significant as the first ASEAN investment arbitration, setting a high bar for treaty coverage.
The detail
Parties: Yaung Chi Oo Trading Pte. Ltd. v. Government of the Union of Myanmar, ASEAN I.D. Case No. ARB/01/1
Case number: italaw/cases/1173
Outcome: The Tribunal unanimously held that it lacked jurisdiction; each party bore its own costs and shared tribunal costs equally.
Applicable law: 1987 ASEAN Agreement for the Promotion and Protection of Investments; 1998 Framework Agreement on the ASEAN Investment Area; Myanmar Foreign Investment Law; Joint Venture Agreement governed by Myanmar law.
Issues in play: The key issue was whether the investment was covered by the 1987 ASEAN Agreement, requiring specific approval and registration. The Tribunal interpreted the definition of 'investment' and the requirement of 'effective management' in Singapore, and the effect of the 1998 Framework Agreement on the 1987 Agreement.
Read the full decision at italaw ↗
Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.