The ICSID Convention was founded on a multilateral agreement and entered into force on 14 October 1966. The articles of the IFC agreement contain the almost identical provisions.  A literal interpretation concludes that the World Bank and IFC do not seek immunity in the domestic courts of the United States, where their head office is located, unless a person sues the World Bank on behalf of the United States or one (or more) of its member states. In mendaro v World Bank, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals therefore had to ascert whether Article VII(3) of the Bank`s Statute constituted a waiver of immunity within the meaning of the IOIA and, if so, whether that exemption was sufficiently extensive to cover labour law disputes. The court`s starting point was “the interaction between the functions of the Bank as defined in the Statute of the Convention and the objectives underlying international immunities”.  The Tribunal stated that “Article VII,3 expressly set immunity, but the scope of its limitation on immunity is unclear.” To clarify this point, the Court of Appeal concluded, of the functional necessity of IO`s immunity, that “it is likely that most organizations would not be willing to waive their immunity without obtaining a corresponding benefit that would benefit the objectives of the organization.” . . .