{"id":291711,"date":"2026-07-31T16:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-07-31T14:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/?p=291711"},"modified":"2026-07-19T14:03:37","modified_gmt":"2026-07-19T12:03:37","slug":"treaty-silence-does-not-end-the-inquiry-cour-de-cassation-gives-effect-to-subsequent-state-practice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/2026\/07\/31\/treaty-silence-does-not-end-the-inquiry-cour-de-cassation-gives-effect-to-subsequent-state-practice\/","title":{"rendered":"Treaty Silence Does Not End the Inquiry: Cour de cassation Gives Effect to Subsequent State Practice"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\"><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-fh-holding-moscow-limited-v-ao-unicredit-bank-and-unicredit-s-p-a-judgment-of-the-court-of-appeal-of-england-and-wales-2026-ewca-civ-468-friday-17th-april-2026?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Fquery%3D%5B2026%5D+EWCA+Civ+468%26lang%3Den&amp;contents%5B0%5D=en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><\/a><strong><em><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/fr-maya-dangelas-dang-thi-hoang-yen-u-s-global-institute-inc-and-angels-company-inc-v-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-arret-de-la-cour-de-cassation-premiere-chambre-civile-24-10-445-wednesday-6th-may-2026\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Cour de cassation, 1st civil chamber, 6 May 2026, n\u00ba 24-10.445, Vietnam<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>THE AUTHOR<\/strong>:<br><strong>Fouad el Hage<\/strong>, Double Master\u2019s Candidate at <strong>Paris 1 Panth\u00e9on-Sorbonne <\/strong>&amp;<strong> HEC Paris<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center wp-block-paragraph\"><em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/paris-baby-arbitration\/posts\/?feedView=all\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Paris Baby Arbitration (&#8220;PBA&#8221;)<\/a> is building a strong community of future arbitration professionals linked to Paris and beyond. Partnering with\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Daily Jus<\/a>, PBA shares sharp, bilingual analyses and fresh perspectives on the developments shaping the arbitration field, making it more accessible to students and young practitioners worldwide.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:10px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-atbs-tabs atbs-tabs-5b752607 atbs-tabs-6a2a8ed3 atbs-tabs-aa9f8bac atbs-tabs-5e061b7d atbs-tabs-bebade65 atbs-tabs-e4c3d024 atbs-tabs-024d40d4 atbs-tabs-8074491d atbs-tabs-ec08974b atbs-tabs-ae459841 atbs-tabs-012e1490 atbs-tabs-c95d372c atbs-tabs-e53aa7e1 atbs-tabs-d078d18f atbs-tabs-fe8ed5c8 atbs-tabs-4b7fc855 atbs-tabs-e9190e75 atbs-tabs-cc044763 atbs-tabs-e5227453 atbs-tabs-28ee9d1e atbs-tabs-0f9baf1e atbs-tabs-089ca7bc atbs-tabs-d3e0c47d atbs-tabs-6f4e5034 atbs-tabs-edc4d811 atbs-tabs-9f79343d atbs-tabs-e29c0043 atbs-tabs-3388e41b atbs-tabs-eacf5739 atbs-tabs-1640bf1d atbs-tabs-f4af3a56 atbs-tabs-873c354e atbs-tabs-83bd85a4 atbs-tabs-62375cc4 atbs-tabs-5956dcf8\"><div class=\"tabs-container\"><div class=\"tabs-nav\"><ul class=\"tabs-titles\"><li class=\"tab-title icon_left\" data-title-tab-id=\"1\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"tab-title-text\">English<\/span><\/li><li class=\"tab-title icon_left\" data-title-tab-id=\"2\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"tab-title-text\">French<\/span><\/li><\/ul><\/div><div class=\"tabs-content\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-atbs-tab\"><div class=\"single-tab\" data-tab-id=\"1\" data-tab-parent-id=\"atbs-tabs-5b752607\">\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">By a <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/fr-maya-dangelas-dang-thi-hoang-yen-u-s-global-institute-inc-and-angels-company-inc-v-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-arret-de-la-cour-de-cassation-premiere-chambre-civile-24-10-445-wednesday-6th-may-2026\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">judgment dated 6 May 2026<\/a> and published in the <em>Bulletin<\/em>, the First Civil Chamber of the French <em>Cour de cassation<\/em> set aside the judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal of 12 September 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The <em>Cour de cassation<\/em> held that, in accordance with Article 1520 of the Code of Civil Procedure (\u201c<strong>CCP<\/strong>\u201d) and customary international law relating to the interpretation of treaties, as reflected by <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/treaty\/en-vienna-convention-on-the-law-of-treaties-1969-vienna-convention-on-the-law-of-treaties-friday-23rd-may-1969#art_2843\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Article 31 of the Vienna Convention of 23 May 1969<\/a> (\u201c<strong>Convention<\/strong>\u201d), there shall be taken into account, together with the context, any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In the present case, a woman of Vietnamese nationality at birth acquired American nationality by naturalisation on 23 July 2014.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">She founded the companies U.S. Global Institute Inc. and Angels Company Inc. (\u201c<strong>American companies<\/strong>\u201d) in Texas, and used them to invest in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (\u201c<strong>Vietnam<\/strong>\u201d) in a power-plant project, by acquiring shareholdings in a Vietnamese company, Tan Tao Energy Corporation (\u201c<strong>TEC<\/strong>\u201d), set up to carry out that project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">She then declared that she had suffered governmental measures amounting to expropriation following the cancellation of that project by Vietnam in March 2016.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">As a result, she filed a request for arbitration on 4 September 2019, under the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/rule\/en-uncitral-arbitration-rules-1976-uncitral-arbitration-rules-1976?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3DArbitration%2BRules%2Bof%2Bthe%2BUnited%2BNations%2BCommission%2Bon%2BInternational%2BTrade%2BLaw%2Bof%2B15%2BDecember%2B1976%2B%28%25E2%2580%259CUNCITRAL%25E2%2580%259D%29%2C&amp;contents%5B0%5D=en&amp;contents%5B1%5D=fr&amp;contents%5B2%5D=es\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law of 15 December 1976<\/a> (\u201c<strong>UNCITRAL<\/strong>\u201d), on the basis of a breach of the provisions of the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/treaty\/en-agreement-between-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-on-trade-relations-us-viet-nam-trade-relations-agreement-thursday-13th-july-2000?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3DAgreement%2Bbetween%2Bthe%2BUnited%2BStates%2Band%2BVietnam%2Bon%2BTrade%2BRelations%2Bof%2B13%2BJuly%2B2000&amp;contents%5B0%5D=en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Agreement between the United States and Vietnam on Trade Relations of 13 July 2000<\/a> (\u201c<strong>the BIT<\/strong>\u201d).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The arbitral tribunal rendered a <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-maya-dangelas-dang-thi-hoang-yen-u-s-global-institute-inc-and-angels-company-inc-v-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-partial-award-tuesday-1st-march-2022#decision_65706?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3D24-10.445%26document-types%3Dtreaty%2Ccase\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">partial award<\/a> in which it declared itself to have jurisdiction on 8 December 2021. Vietnam then brought an action for setting aside that award on jurisdiction in front of the French courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Paris Court of Appeal dismissed that application by a <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-maya-dangelas-dang-thi-hoang-yen-u-s-global-institute-inc-and-angels-company-inc-v-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-judgment-of-the-paris-court-of-appeal-department-5-chamber-16-22-05075-monday-12th-september-2022#decision_62428?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3D24-10.445%26document-types%3Dtreaty%2Ccase\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">judgment of 12 September 2023<\/a>. Following that, Vietnam lodged an appeal in cassation against that judgment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The fifth branch of the first ground put forward by Vietnam focused on the question of the interpretation of treaties in the light of the Convention, specifically its Article 31.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Indeed, it argued that the Convention amounted to an international custom which must therefore be binding on the French judge when he was called upon to apply, and therefore interpret, an international treaty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Article 31 of the Convention provides in particular that, as Vietnam pointed out, \u201c<em>a treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose<\/em>\u201d. There shall thus be considered, together with the context, \u201c<em>any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions<\/em>\u201d, pursuant to paragraph 3(a) of the same article.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Vietnam then criticised the Court of Appeal for having held that the position of the United States in relation to other treaties \u2013 in particular the diplomatic note issued on 4 April 2023 which the Court considered to be in reality nothing more than an opinion of the Economic Service of the United States Embassy, whose authority has not been established \u2013 was ineffective for the purpose of determining the intention of the contracting States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It thus submited that the Paris Court of Appeal, which ruled \u201c<em>on grounds unfit to exclude the taking into account of the diplomatic note established by the United States Embassy for the interpretation of the scope of the BIT of 13 July 2000<\/em>\u201d, breached Article 31 of the Convention and Article 1520, 1\u00b0 of the CCP.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The <em>Cour de cassation<\/em> began by recalling the content of Article 1520, 1\u00b0 of the CCP, which provides that the action for setting aside is available only if the arbitral tribunal wrongly declared itself to have or to lack jurisdiction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The <em>Cour de cassation<\/em> then embarked on the examination of the arguments concerning customary international law and the interpretation of the BIT under the Convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It confirmed that, as Vietnam pointed out, the interpretation of a treaty must take into account any subsequent agreement reached between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions, in accordance with customary international law as reflected by Article 31 of the Convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The <em>Cour de cassation<\/em> then found that the Paris Court of Appeal stated that the BIT contained no provision concerning investors holding dual American and Vietnamese nationality, the only requirement relating to its application being that a natural person be a national of a Party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It then found that the Paris Court of Appeal considered that none of the official documents contemporaneous with the negotiation of that BIT produced by Vietnam called into question that reading of the provisions of the BIT, and that the diplomatic note issued on 4 April 2023 was merely an opinion of the Economic Service of the United States Embassy and therefore had no bearing on that interpretation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The <em>Cour of cassation<\/em> concluded by observing that the judgment by the Paris Court of Appeal held that the general rules of interpretation of the Convention did not make it possible to conclude that those provisions would deprive the dual-national investor of the protection established by the BIT, since they neither led to drawing a distinction where the text drew none, nor to modifying the application or the terms of a Treaty whose wording was clear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">However, the <em>Cour de cassation<\/em> was set to adopt a completely contradictory interpretation, both very interesting and highly debatable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It ruled that the diplomatic note issued on 4 April 2023 and addressed to Vietnam by the United States Embassy constituted an agreement reached between the States Parties regarding the interpretation of the BIT. That agreement related precisely to the situation on which the BIT did not pronounce, namely that in which the investor is a natural person holding dual American and Vietnamese nationality, thereby excluding dual nationals from the protection provided for by the BIT.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In conclusion, the <em>Cour de Cassation<\/em> summarised the scope of the judgment by affirming that, under the customary international law rules on treaty interpretation reflected in Article 31(3)(a) of the Vienna Convention of 23 May 1969, courts must take into account any subsequent agreement between the parties concerning the interpretation of a treaty or the application of its provisions. It held that a court breaches those principles where it refuses to consider diplomatic exchanges between the States parties establishing a shared interpretation of the treaty, particularly where the treaty itself does not expressly exclude the protection of dual-national investors and draws no distinction in that regard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The <em>Cour de cassation<\/em> therefore held that the Court of Appeal breached the aforementioned provisions by ruling otherwise and set aside its judgment delivered on 12 September 2023 in all its provisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">What makes the judgment particularly significant is the French Court of cassation\u2019s approach to treaty interpretation: treaty silence on dual nationality was not enough; subsequent State practice and interpretative agreement mattered decisively; and French courts confirmed that they may closely review whether arbitral tribunals correctly applied international law rules on treaty interpretation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:10px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center wp-block-paragraph\">T<em>his article was originally published in the PBA Bulletin on June 5, 2026 with thanks to Paris Baby Arbitration, Jus Mundi &amp; Jus Connect.<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-content-justification-center is-layout-flex wp-container-core-buttons-is-layout-fe48e5de wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/pbarbitration.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/BULLETIN-86-ENG.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">read it Here<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>ABOUT THE AUTHOR<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Fouad el Hage<\/strong>&nbsp;is a double Master\u2019s candidate at <strong>Paris 1 Panth\u00e9on-Sorbonne<\/strong> &amp; <strong>HEC Paris<\/strong>.&nbsp; He completed an internship in the Arbitration, Compliance and Litigation department of <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/firm\/norton-rose-fulbright\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Norton Rose Fulbright LLP<\/a> in June 2026. He has consistently pursued professional experiences in international business law, with a particular focus on international arbitration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">*<em><em>The&nbsp;views&nbsp;and opinions expressed by authors are theirs and do not necessarily reflect those of their organizations, employers, or Daily Jus, Jus Mundi, or Jus Connect.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-atbs-tab\"><div class=\"single-tab\" data-tab-id=\"2\" data-tab-parent-id=\"atbs-tabs-5b752607\">\n<h1 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong><em><strong>Le silence du trait\u00e9 ne met pas fin \u00e0 l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation : la Cour de cassation donne effet \u00e0 un accord interpr\u00e9tatif ult\u00e9rieur entre les \u00c9tats<\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong><em><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/fr-china-communications-construction-company-ltd-v-respondent-1-respondent-2-respondent-3-respondent-4-and-respondent-5-arret-de-la-cour-d-appel-de-paris-pole-5-chambre-16-23-16464-tuesday-8th-april-2025\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><\/a><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/fr-maya-dangelas-dang-thi-hoang-yen-u-s-global-institute-inc-and-angels-company-inc-v-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-ordonnance-de-la-cour-de-cassation-premiere-presidence-24-10-445-thursday-26th-september-2024?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3D24-10.445%26document-types%3Dtreaty%2Ccase&amp;contents%5B0%5D=fr\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Cour de cassation, 1<sup>re<\/sup> chambre civile, 6 mai 2026, n\u00ba 24-10.445, <em>Vietnam<\/em><\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Par un <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/fr-maya-dangelas-dang-thi-hoang-yen-u-s-global-institute-inc-and-angels-company-inc-v-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-arret-de-la-cour-de-cassation-premiere-chambre-civile-24-10-445-wednesday-6th-may-2026\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">arr\u00eat en date du 6 mai 2026<\/a> et publi\u00e9 au Bulletin, la premi\u00e8re chambre civile de la Cour de cassation a cass\u00e9 l&#8217;arr\u00eat de la Cour d&#8217;appel de Paris datant du 12 septembre 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour de cassation a jug\u00e9 que, conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 l\u2019article 1520 du Code de proc\u00e9dure civile (\u00ab&nbsp;<strong>CPC<\/strong>&nbsp;\u00bb) et au droit international coutumier relatif \u00e0 l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation des trait\u00e9s, tel que refl\u00e9t\u00e9 par <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/treaty\/en-vienna-convention-on-the-law-of-treaties-1969-vienna-convention-on-the-law-of-treaties-friday-23rd-may-1969#art_2843\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">l&#8217;article 31 de la Convention de Vienne du 23 mai 1969<\/a> (\u00ab&nbsp;<strong>la Convention<\/strong>&nbsp;\u00bb), il doit \u00eatre tenu compte, en m\u00eame temps que du contexte, de tout accord ult\u00e9rieur intervenu entre les parties au sujet de l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation du trait\u00e9 ou de l&#8217;application de ses dispositions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">En l&#8217;esp\u00e8ce, une femme de nationalit\u00e9 vietnamienne \u00e0 sa naissance, a acquis la nationalit\u00e9 am\u00e9ricaine par naturalisation le 23 juillet 2014.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Elle a fond\u00e9 les soci\u00e9t\u00e9s U.S. Global Institute Inc. et Angels Company Inc. (\u00ab&nbsp;<strong>les soci\u00e9t\u00e9s am\u00e9ricaines&nbsp;<\/strong>\u00bb) au Texas, et les a utilis\u00e9es pour investir dans la R\u00e9publique socialiste du Vietnam (\u00ab&nbsp;<strong>Vietnam<\/strong>&nbsp;\u00bb) dans un projet de centrale \u00e9lectrique, en prenant des participations dans une soci\u00e9t\u00e9 vietnamienne Tan Tao Energy Corporation (\u00ab&nbsp;<strong>la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 TEC<\/strong>&nbsp;\u00bb) cr\u00e9\u00e9e pour mener ce projet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Elle d\u00e9clare alors avoir subi des mesures gouvernementales constituant une expropriation \u00e0 la suite de la suppression de ce projet par le Vietnam en mars 2016. De ce fait, elle a d\u00e9pos\u00e9 une requ\u00eate d\u2019arbitrage le 4 septembre 2019, conform\u00e9ment au <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/rule\/en-uncitral-arbitration-rules-1976-uncitral-arbitration-rules-1976?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3DArbitration%2BRules%2Bof%2Bthe%2BUnited%2BNations%2BCommission%2Bon%2BInternational%2BTrade%2BLaw%2Bof%2B15%2BDecember%2B1976%2B%28%25E2%2580%259CUNCITRAL%25E2%2580%259D%29%2C&amp;contents%5B0%5D=en&amp;contents%5B1%5D=fr&amp;contents%5B2%5D=es\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">r\u00e8glement d&#8217;arbitrage de la Commission des Nations Unies pour le droit commercial international du 15 d\u00e9cembre 1976<\/a> (\u00ab&nbsp;<strong>la CNUDCI<\/strong>&nbsp;\u00bb), au titre d&#8217;une violation des stipulations de <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/treaty\/en-agreement-between-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-on-trade-relations-us-viet-nam-trade-relations-agreement-thursday-13th-july-2000?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3DAgreement%2Bbetween%2Bthe%2BUnited%2BStates%2Band%2BVietnam%2Bon%2BTrade%2BRelations%2Bof%2B13%2BJuly%2B2000&amp;contents%5B0%5D=en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">l&#8217;Accord entre les \u00c9tats-Unis et le Vietnam relatif \u00e0 leurs relations commerciales du 13 juillet 2000<\/a> (\u00ab&nbsp;<strong>le TBI&nbsp;<\/strong>\u00bb).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Le 8 d\u00e9cembre 2021, le tribunal arbitral a rendu une <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-maya-dangelas-dang-thi-hoang-yen-u-s-global-institute-inc-and-angels-company-inc-v-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-partial-award-tuesday-1st-march-2022#decision_65706?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3D24-10.445%26document-types%3Dtreaty%2Ccase\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">sentence partielle<\/a> dans laquelle il a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 \u00eatre comp\u00e9tent. \u00c0 la suite de cela, le Vietnam a form\u00e9 un recours en annulation contre cette sentence sur la comp\u00e9tence devant les juridictions fran\u00e7aises.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour d&#8217;appel de Paris a rejet\u00e9 cette demande par un <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-maya-dangelas-dang-thi-hoang-yen-u-s-global-institute-inc-and-angels-company-inc-v-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam-judgment-of-the-paris-court-of-appeal-department-5-chamber-16-22-05075-monday-12th-september-2022#decision_62428?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3D24-10.445%26document-types%3Dtreaty%2Ccase\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">arr\u00eat du 12 septembre 2023<\/a>. Le Vietnam forme alors un pourvoi en cassation contre cet arr\u00eat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La cinqui\u00e8me branche du premier moyen, \u00e9tabli par le Vietnam, porte sur l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation des trait\u00e9s \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re de la Convention, en particulier de son article 31.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">En effet, elle consid\u00e8re que cette Convention est constitutive d&#8217;une coutume internationale, qui doit donc \u00eatre opposable au juge fran\u00e7ais lorsqu&#8217;il doit appliquer et interpr\u00e9ter un trait\u00e9 international.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">L\u2019article 31 de la Convention dispose notamment que, comme le soul\u00e8ve le Vietnam, \u00ab <em>un trait\u00e9 doit \u00eatre interpr\u00e9t\u00e9 de bonne foi suivant le sens ordinaire \u00e0 attribuer aux termes du trait\u00e9 dans leur contexte et \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re de son objet et de son but<\/em> <strong>\u00bb<\/strong>. Il sera ainsi tenu compte, en m\u00eame temps que du contexte, de \u00ab <em>tout accord ult\u00e9rieur intervenu entre les parties au sujet de l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation du trait\u00e9 ou de l&#8217;application de ses dispositions <\/em><strong>\u00bb <\/strong>en vertu du 3. a) dudit article.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Le Vietnam reproche alors \u00e0 la Cour d&#8217;appel d\u2019avoir retenu que la position des \u00c9tats-Unis relative \u00e0 d&#8217;autres trait\u00e9s \u2013 notamment la note diplomatique \u00e9mise le 4 avril 2023, jugeant qu\u2019elle n&#8217;est en r\u00e9alit\u00e9 qu&#8217;un avis du service \u00e9conomique de l&#8217;ambassade des \u00c9tats-Unis dont l&#8217;autorit\u00e9 n&#8217;est pas \u00e9tablie \u2013 est inop\u00e9rante pour d\u00e9terminer la volont\u00e9 des \u00c9tats contractants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Il d\u00e9clare alors que la Cour d&#8217;appel de Paris, qui a statu\u00e9 sur des \u00ab<em>&nbsp;motifs impropres \u00e0 exclure la prise en compte de la note diplomatique \u00e9tablie par l&#8217;ambassade des \u00c9tats-Unis pour l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation de la port\u00e9e du TBI du 13 juillet 2000<\/em>&nbsp;\u00bb, a viol\u00e9 l&#8217;article 31 de la Convention et l&#8217;article 1520, 1\u00b0, du CPC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour de cassation commence par rappeler le contenu de l\u2019article 1520, 1\u00b0 du CPC qui dispose que le recours en annulation n\u2019est ouvert que si le tribunal arbitral s&#8217;est d\u00e9clar\u00e9 \u00e0 tort comp\u00e9tent ou incomp\u00e9tent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour de cassation se lance ensuite dans l&#8217;\u00e9tude des arguments aurelatifs le droit international coutumier et \u00e0 l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation du TBI au regard de la Convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Elle confirme que, comme l\u2019a pr\u00e9cis\u00e9 le Vietnam, aux fins de l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation d&#8217;un trait\u00e9, il doit \u00eatre tenu compte de tout accord ult\u00e9rieur intervenu entre les parties au sujet de l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation du trait\u00e9 ou de l&#8217;application de ses dispositions conform\u00e9ment au droit international coutumier tel que refl\u00e9t\u00e9 par l&#8217;article 31 de la Convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour de cassation constate alors que la Cour d&#8217;appel de Paris a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 que le TBI ne contient aucune disposition relative aux investisseurs ayant la double nationalit\u00e9 am\u00e9ricaine et vietnamienne, la seule exigence de son application \u00e9tant qu\u2019une personne physique soit ressortissante d&#8217;une des Parties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Elle constate ensuite que la Cour d\u2019appel de Paris consid\u00e8re qu\u2019aucun des documents officiels contemporains \u00e0 la n\u00e9gociation de ce TBI produits par le Vietnam ne remet en cause cette lecture des dispositions du TBI et que la note diplomatique \u00e9mise le 4 avril 2023 n&#8217;est qu&#8217;un avis du service \u00e9conomique de l&#8217;ambassade des \u00c9tats-Unis et n\u2019a donc aucune incidence sur cette interpr\u00e9tation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour de cassation conclut, apr\u00e8s analyse, que l&#8217;arr\u00eat de la Cour d\u2019appel retient que les r\u00e8gles g\u00e9n\u00e9rales d&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation de la Convention ne permettent pas de conclure que ces dispositions priveraient l&#8217;investisseur binational de la protection institu\u00e9e par le TBI, celles-ci ne conduisant pas \u00e0 distinguer l\u00e0 o\u00f9 le texte ne distingue pas, ni \u00e0 modifier l&#8217;application ou les termes d&#8217;un Trait\u00e9 lorsque celui-ci est clair.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Or, la Cour de cassation s\u2019appr\u00eate \u00e0 adopter une interpr\u00e9tation compl\u00e8tement contradictoire, \u00e0 la fois tr\u00e8s int\u00e9ressante et tr\u00e8s discutable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Elle statue que la note diplomatique \u00e9mise le 4 avril 2023 et adress\u00e9e au Vietnam par l&#8217;ambassade des \u00c9tats-Unis constituait un accord intervenu entre les \u00c9tats Parties au sujet de l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation du TBI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Cet accord concernerait justement l&#8217;hypoth\u00e8se sur laquelle le TBI ne se pronon\u00e7ait pas, dans laquelle l&#8217;investisseur est une personne physique ayant la double nationalit\u00e9 am\u00e9ricaine et vietnamienne, excluant alors les doubles nationaux de la protection pr\u00e9vue par le TBI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">En conclusion, la Cour de cassation a r\u00e9sum\u00e9 la port\u00e9e de cet arr\u00eat en affirmant que, conform\u00e9ment aux r\u00e8gles du droit international coutumier relatives \u00e0 l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation des trait\u00e9s, telles que refl\u00e9t\u00e9es \u00e0 l\u2019article 31(3)(a) de la Convention de Vienne du 23 mai 1969, les juridictions doivent tenir compte de tout accord ult\u00e9rieur intervenu entre les parties concernant l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation d\u2019un trait\u00e9 ou l\u2019application de ses dispositions. Elle a jug\u00e9 qu\u2019une juridiction m\u00e9conna\u00eet ces principes lorsqu\u2019elle refuse de prendre en consid\u00e9ration des \u00e9changes diplomatiques entre les \u00c9tats parties \u00e9tablissant une interpr\u00e9tation commune du trait\u00e9, en particulier lorsque le trait\u00e9 lui-m\u00eame n\u2019exclut pas express\u00e9ment la protection des investisseurs binationaux et n\u2019op\u00e8re aucune distinction \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour de cassation juge alors que la Cour d&#8217;appel a viol\u00e9 les textes susvis\u00e9s en jugeant autrement et casse et annule l&#8217;arr\u00eat du 12 septembre 2023 en toutes ses dispositions.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Ce qui rend l&#8217;arr\u00eat particuli\u00e8rement significatif tient \u00e0 l&#8217;approche retenue par la Cour de cassation fran\u00e7aise en mati\u00e8re d&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation des trait\u00e9s : le silence du trait\u00e9 quant \u00e0 la double nationalit\u00e9 ne suffisait pas ; la pratique ult\u00e9rieure des \u00c9tats et l&#8217;accord interpr\u00e9tatif intervenu entre les parties rev\u00eataient d\u2019une importance d\u00e9cisive ; et les juridictions fran\u00e7aises ont confirm\u00e9 qu&#8217;elles peuvent contr\u00f4ler \u00e9troitement le point de savoir si les tribunaux arbitraux ont correctement appliqu\u00e9 les r\u00e8gles de droit international relatives \u00e0 l&#8217;interpr\u00e9tation des trait\u00e9s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:10px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center wp-block-paragraph\"><em><em>Cet article a \u00e9t\u00e9 initialement publi\u00e9 dans l<\/em><\/em>e bulletin PBA<em><em> le vendredi 5 juin, 2026, avec le soutien de Paris Baby Arbitration, Jus Mundi &amp; Jus Connect.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-content-justification-center is-layout-flex wp-container-core-buttons-is-layout-fe48e5de wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/pbarbitration.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/BULLETIN-86-FR.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">lire Ici<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>ABOUT THE AUTHOR<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Fouad el Hage<\/strong>&nbsp;is a double Master\u2019s candidate at <strong>Paris 1 Panth\u00e9on-Sorbonne<\/strong> &amp; <strong>HEC Paris<\/strong>.&nbsp; He completed an internship in the Arbitration, Compliance and Litigation department of <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/firm\/norton-rose-fulbright\">Norton Rose Fulbright LLP<\/a> in June 2026. He has consistently pursued professional experiences in international business law, with a particular focus on international arbitration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">*<em><em>Les points de vue et les opinions exprim\u00e9s par les auteurs sont les leurs et ne refl\u00e8tent pas n\u00e9cessairement ceux de leurs organisations, de leurs employeurs ou de Daily Jus, Jus Mundi ou Jus Connect.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>French Cour de cassation sets aside an arbitral award judgment, ruling that diplomatic notes exclude dual nationals from BITs under treaty interpretation rules.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":291730,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":{"format":"standard","override":[{"template":"custom","single_blog_custom":"274736","parallax":"1","fullscreen":"1","layout":"right-sidebar","sidebar":"author","second_sidebar":"default-sidebar","sticky_sidebar":"1","share_position":"hide","share_float_style":"share-monocrhome","show_featured":"1","show_post_meta":"1","show_post_date":"1","post_date_format":"default","post_date_format_custom":"Y\/m\/d","show_post_reading_time":"0","post_reading_time_wpm":"300","post_calculate_word_method":"str_word_count","show_zoom_button":"0","zoom_button_out_step":"2","zoom_button_in_step":"3","show_comment_section":"1","number_popup_post":"1","show_post_related":"0","show_inline_post_related":"0"}],"image_override":[{"single_post_thumbnail_size":"crop-500","single_post_gallery_size":"crop-500"}],"trending_post_position":"meta","trending_post_label":"Trending","sponsored_post_label":"Sponsored by","disable_ad":"0"},"jnews_primary_category":{"id":"179"},"jnews_social_meta":{"twitter_description":"French Cour de cassation sets aside an arbitral award judgment, ruling that diplomatic notes exclude dual nationals from BITs under treaty interpretation rules.","fb_description":"French Cour de cassation sets aside an arbitral award judgment, ruling that diplomatic notes exclude dual nationals from BITs under treaty interpretation rules.","fb_title":"Treaty Silence Does Not End the Inquiry: Cour de cassation Gives Effect to Subsequent State Practice","twitter_title":"Treaty Silence Does Not End the Inquiry: Cour de cassation Gives Effect to Subsequent State Practice","fb_image":"291731","twitter_image":"291731"},"jnews_review":[],"enable_review":"","type":"","name":"","summary":"","brand":"","sku":"","good":[],"bad":[],"score_override":"","override_value":"","rating":[],"price":[],"jnews_override_counter":{"view_counter_number":"0","share_counter_number":"0","like_counter_number":"0","dislike_counter_number":"0"},"footnotes":""},"categories":[162,205,209,170,198,197,167,179,195,208,188,276,163,241,161,247],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-291711","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-americas","category-arbitration","category-arbitration-aftermath-post-award","category-asia-pacific","category-electric-power","category-energy","category-europe","category-france","category-industry","category-investor-state-arbitration","category-legal-insights","category-paris-baby-arbitration-pba","category-u-s-a","category-vietnam","category-world","category-worldwide-perspectives"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/291711","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=291711"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/291711\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":291745,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/291711\/revisions\/291745"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/291730"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=291711"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=291711"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=291711"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=291711"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}