Vishipco Line et al. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A research an International Law Case Vishipco Line et al. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. and explain in a report format on the background of the dispute,...

Vishipco Line et al. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A
    Vishipco Line et al. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A    ultimate liability doctrine- A report
    
    
Executive Summary
The troublesome issues within the relations that exist between the United States to that of the third world revolves around the economic situations between the two. The urgency for both capital as well as that of the develop is quite prominent in the third world countries, since the need is there for development of the industries which will then offer them with the significant rate of return, to that of the taxation benefit, and also other regulatory advantages for attracting investment within necessary for the industrial development. So, when these advantages become combined with economy of the United States, it in itself causes the significant rise when it comes to the business investment amount in international location by the banks and businesses in the United States. But, when the decline of pleasant relations strikes, then for expropriation, the United States become the luscious target. In most situations the United States backed oppositions have had to surrender for gaining revenge as well as to benefitted economically, in a compulsion so as to seize assets available to banks and business of the United States, and based on these concerns the owners who takes the assets either bring legal action as against the United States business acting as the asset depository or who are positioned as the importer in charge of returning the assets, for the recovery of those assets already seized. While arguing in favour of the Vishipco, the following reports highlight the case of (Vishipco Line v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A., 1981), where the United States Seconds' Circuit bench held the United States Bank liable for the depositions by the Vietnam banks, where the United States banks made the seizure of the latter's property.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary    1
Background of dispute    3
Facts of the case    3
The legal issues presented    5
Arguments by individual parties    5
The decision of the Tribunal    6
Significance in International Law    7
References    9
Background of the dispute
Vishipco Line v Chase Manhattan Bank’s case (Vishipco Line v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A., 1981) is based on the claims involved against those big shot U.S. banks who declared the closure of their Saigon branches, just before the fall of the South Vietnamese Government during 1975. The plaintiffs being the nationals of South Vietnam were also residents of the United States when they deposited the money in United States bank and even brought the claim before the Court. Initially, the case was dismissed since it was barred by New York's statute of limitations, as was opined in cases of (Tat Ba v Chase Manhattan Bank, 1984), and also in case of (Ngoc Dung Thi Tran v Citibank, 1983). Holding the banks liable the Court based its theory on the ultimate doctrine where it applied the New York law for resolving the disputes. But for avoiding the doctrine of a separate entity, the Court emphasized closing the banks' Saigon branches by the defendants, in the period when the South Vietnamese Government fell, and the new government made the nationalisation of the banks. So, the Court, in its findings, observed that situs of debt had a sharp increase and went back to the home office of the Chase Manhattan Bank because the Saigon was no longer doing the operations.
Facts of the case
From the time between1966 till the day that is April 24, 1975, a branch office was operated by Chase in Saigon. The ten corporate clients was the depositors, being the Vishipco Line, Ha Nam Cong Ty, Dai Nam Hang Hai C.T., Rang Dong Hang Hai C.T., Mekong Ship Co. Sarl, Vishipco Sarl, Thai Binh C.T., VN Tau Bien C.T., Van An Hang Hai C.T., and Cong Ty U Tau Sao Mai who maintained the demand deposit accounts concerning the piastre at the Saigon branch held by Chase during the year 1975. The above- named depositors that are the corporate clients was operating as the provider for the shipping service within Southeast Asia to the government of...