79 ELETTRONICA SICULA (JUDGMENT) aliens or foreign corporations and associations of the shares in, or instruments of indebtedness of, corporations and associations of such High Contracting Party carrying on particular types of activities. 4. The nationals, corporations and associations of either High Contracting Party shall, subject to the exceptions in paragraph 3 of Article IX, receive treatment in respect of al1 matters which relate to the acquisition, ownership, lease, possession or disposition of persona1 property, no less favorable than the treatment which is or may hereafter be accorded to nationals, corporations and associations of any third country." The Italian text of the opening sentence of paragraph 1 is as follows : "1cittadini e le persone giuridiche ed associazioni di ciascuna Alta Parte Contraente avrannofacoltà di acquistare, possedere e disporre di beni immobili O di altri diritti reali nei territori dell'altra Alta Parte Contraente alle seguenti condizioni . . ." 132. It was objected by Italy that this Article does not apply at al1 to Raytheon and Machlett because their own property rights ("diritti reali'y were limited to shares in ELSI, and the immovable property in question (the plant in Palermo) was owned by ELSI, an Italian company. The United States contended that "immovable property or interests therein" is a phrase sufficiently broad to include indirect ownership of property rights held through a subsidiary that is not a United States corporation. The argument turned to a considerable extent on the difference in meaning between the English, "interests" and the Italian, "diritti reali". "Interest" in English no doubt has several possible meanings. But since it is in English usage a term commonly used to denote different kinds of rights in land (for example rights such as charges, or easements, and many kinds of "future interests"), it is possible to interpret the English and Italian versions of Article VI1 as meaning much the same thing ;especially as the clause in question is in any event limited to immovable property. The Chamber however has some sympathy with the contention of the United States, as being more in accord with the general purpose of the FCN Treaty. The United States argument is further that Raytheon and Machlett, being the owners of al1 the shares, were in practice the persons who alone could decide (before the bankruptcy), whether to dispose of the immovable property of the company; accordingly, if the requisition