Jurisdiction — Dispute — Investment — Minority or indirect shareholding — Whether the dispute concerned an investment of a national or company of one party to the BIT in the territory of the other party — Whether the BIT required merely an ownership interest in an asset or required an association of belonging or contribution of value

Interpretation — Investment “of” a national or company — VCLT, Article 31 — Whether the ordinary meaning and context indicated a requirement of passive ownership or active investment — Whether the object and purpose of the BIT supported a requirement of the claimant taking on an active role of direction or control

Interpretation — Supplementary means of interpretation — VCLT, Article 32 — Whether provisions in other BITs confirmed or determined the meaning of the disputed treaty text — Whether case law confirmed or determined the meaning of the disputed treaty text

Evidence — Direction or control — Whether any evidence had been adduced to show that the investment was made at the direction of the claimant

Procedure — Judicial economy — ICSID Convention, Article 48(3) — Whether the tribunal dealt with every question submitted — Whether policy considerations weighed against gratuitous resolution of factually and legally complex questions