You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

March 5, 2026

A Smarter Forum? The Specialized Court at Vietnam’s International Financial Center

Amid increasing financial globalization, Vietnam’s establishment of an International Financial Center (IFC) represents a strategic initiative to attract high-quality foreign investment and enhance the country’s position in the global financial system. In support of this objective, a Specialized Court was introduced under Resolution No. 222/2025/QH15 as a dedicated dispute resolution mechanism within the IFC framework. The Specialized Court at the IFC was subsequently operationalized by Law on the Specialized Court No. 150/2025/QH15, effective from January 1, 2026.

Organizational Structure of the Specialized Court

The Specialized Court at the IFC is a court within the system of the People’s Courts, organized and operating in accordance with the Law on the Specialized Court, and vested with jurisdiction to adjudicate and resolve cases at the IFC.

The Specialized Court is located in Ho Chi Minh City and comprises (i) a Court of First Instance; (ii) a Court of Appeal, and (iii) a supporting apparatus.

Jurisdiction of the Specialized Court

The jurisdiction of the Specialized Court at the IFC is strictly defined based on both (i) the subject matter of the cases and (ii) the membership status of the parties involved. Specifically, the Specialized Court has jurisdiction over (except for cases involving public interests or the interests of the state) the following:

  • Disputes arising from investment and business activities.
  • Requests for recognition and enforcement in Vietnam of judgments and decisions of foreign courts and foreign arbitral awards.
  • Requests related to dispute resolution by arbitration.
  • Other disputes directly related to investment and business activities (to be specified by the Supreme People’s Court).

Additionally, at least one party in the case must be a member of the IFC. The IFC’s membership status is established through registration, recognition as a member, or the grant of a license for establishment and operation within the IFC.

In the event of a jurisdictional conflict between the Specialized Court and the People’s Court system, the chief justice of the Specialized Court has the authority to determine which court has jurisdiction over the case. Any complaint against such determination will be resolved by the Supreme People’s Court, whose decision is final. However, to date, no implementing guidance (in the form of resolutions, decrees, or circulars) has been issued by the Supreme People’s Court in relation to this mechanism. Accordingly, the practical application of these provisions remains subject to further official guidance.

Distinguishing Features of the Specialized Court

Although the Specialized Court remains subject, to some extent, to the Law on the Organization of the People’s Courts and other relevant legislation, it exhibits several notable distinguishing features, including the following:

  • Statute of limitations: The statute of limitations for initiating proceedings before the Specialized Court is generally six years from the date on which the event giving rise to the procedural proceedings occurs, which is longer than the limitation period applicable under the ordinary court procedure for cases of a similar nature falling within the jurisdiction of the Specialized Court.
  • Finality of appellate judgment: Unlike ordinary judicial proceedings, judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal of the Specialized Court are final and are not subject to cassation or retrial.
  • Language of proceedings: The language used in proceedings and judgments or decisions of the Specialized Court is English, or English accompanied by a Vietnamese translation.
  • Electronic proceedings: The entire judicial process, from the filing of the statement of claim to the issuance of judgments or decisions, may be conducted entirely through electronic means.
  • Separate procedural rules: In addition to Vietnamese law, the Specialized Court is allowed to apply its own procedural rules, promulgated by the Supreme People’s Court, to govern the adjudication of cases. (At present, these procedural rules have not yet been issued and are still under consideration, with expected completion before December 31, 2026.)
  • Representation by foreign lawyers: Parties are permitted to authorize foreign lawyers holding valid practicing certificates issued by competent foreign authorities or organizations to act as their representatives before the Specialized Court.
  • Composition of the adjudicating body: Cases are adjudicated by a single judge, unless the parties request otherwise or the case is of a complex nature, in which case a panel of three judges will be constituted. Notably, People’s Jurors and the People’s Procuracy do not participate in the adjudication or supervision of proceedings before the Specialized Court.
  • Eligibility of judges: Foreign and Vietnamese individuals are eligible for appointment as judges of the Specialized Court, subject to compliance with the conditions prescribed under the Law on the Specialized Court. Foreign individuals must be current or former foreign judges, or reputable lawyers or experts with good moral character and relevant expertise in investment and business law, with at least 10 years of experience in adjudicating or resolving investment and business-related matters. They must also have sufficient English proficiency to conduct proceedings before the Specialized Court, and be under 75 years of age with adequate health to perform their duties. The participation of foreign judges is expected to enhance the effectiveness and sophistication in handling cross-border matters, as well as to reinforce the neutrality and international credibility of the court system, thereby increasing its attractiveness to international investors.

Outlook

Although the Law on the Specialized Court has been effective since January 1, 2026, many related issues, such as court fees, litigation costs, enforcement mechanisms, and the organization of supporting bodies, remain under development, and are expected to be determined within 2026.

Collectively, the new features mark a clear departure from Vietnam’s traditional court adjudication model. The Specialized Court offers a modern, internationally aligned dispute resolution mechanism that simplifies procedures, shortens resolution timelines, and is particularly conducive to business and foreign investment within the IFC.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 9, 2026
On April 28, 2026, the Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM) issued Notification No. 18/2026 introducing the new Foreign Remittance Business Regulations. The new regulations apply to companies intending to operate foreign remittance businesses in Myanmar that are not licensed banks, non-bank financial institutions, or other financial institutions. The regulations supersede and replace the previous regulatory framework governing foreign remittance businesses under CBM Notification No. 21/2019. While the overall structure remains familiar, the new regulations introduce more detailed requirements for licensing, operations, reporting, and compliance, with a stronger focus on transparency and regulatory oversight. Broader Licensing Requirements Under the new regulations, applicants must submit detailed business plans describing the use of information technology and mobile platforms, along with clear plans for handling remittances from workers abroad and resolving customer complaints. Financial Thresholds and Reporting Requirements The baseline financial thresholds remain unchanged. Licensees must maintain a security deposit of MMK 100 million in an escrow account, along with a separate revolving fund dedicated solely to remittance operations. The new regulations introduce more structured reporting obligations. Licensees are now required to submit daily remittance transaction data by the next business day before noon, in addition to monthly and periodic reporting requirements. Foreign bank account statements must also be submitted regularly, and licensees must provide updates on business operations every six months. Strengthened AML and CFT Framework The new regulations place a greater emphasis on anti-money laundering (AML) and counter financing of terrorism (CFT), with tighter controls over management changes. Any changes in shareholding, share transfers, or the appointment of key management personnel such as the managing director require prior approval from the CBM. Licensing Fees and Validity The new regulations increase licensing costs, while maintaining the same validity period of three years. The new regulations provide more detailed grounds for suspension and
May 25, 2026
After several years of policy discussion and continued efforts led by the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) to relax the list of reserved businesses under the Foreign Business Act B.E. 2542 (1999) (FBA), the reform process has now reached a significant milestone. On May 12, 2026, the Thai cabinet approved in principle two draft subordinate legislative instruments aimed at delisting certain reserved business activities under the FBA and reducing licensing requirements for foreign business operators. These developments signal a renewed and concrete effort by the government to modernize Thailand’s business regulatory framework in order to attract foreign investment and boost Thailand’s competitiveness in the global market. Nine Businesses Set for FBA Delisting Below is a list of the nine businesses that are being targeted for delisting from the FBA’s restrictions. A draft ministerial regulation would delist the first eight reserved businesses, while a royal decree has been drafted to delist the ninth business: Telecommunications services (Type 1 license only, covering operators without their own telecommunications infrastructure), under the supervision of the Office of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission. Treasury center services subject to the Foreign Exchange Control Act B.E. 2485 and under the supervision of the Bank of Thailand. Securities-collateralized lending, pursuant to the laws governing securities and exchange and derivatives regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Agency, dealer, advisory, or fund management services relating to derivatives where the underlying assets fall outside the scope of the Derivatives Act B.E. 2546 (2003) Intra-group shared services, including administrative, human resources, and IT functions Intra-group domestic debt guarantee services Leasing of partial space for installation of financial service machines and automatic vending machines for employee use Petroleum drilling services Trading of agricultural product derivatives through a futures exchange, with physical delivery or receipt of agricultural products at a futures exchange–designated
May 25, 2026
Thailand published new rules on May 1, 2026, establishing clear procedures for how the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) handles digital assets seized during criminal and money laundering investigations. Taking effect the following day, the Regulation of the Anti-Money Laundering Board on the Custody and Management of Seized or Frozen Assets (No. 3) B.E. 2569 applies to digital asset businesses, cryptocurrency holders, and anyone subject to asset seizure under Thailand’s anti-money laundering laws. For the first time, authorities now have a detailed roadmap for transferring seized digital property from private or foreign control into secure state custody. Digital asset businesses holding customer assets under investigation must be prepared to comply with these rules compelling repatriation of such assets in enforcement actions. Expanded Definition of Digital Assets The regulation defines digital assets to include not only those covered by Thailand’s existing digital asset business law but also any other property that can be stored using the same methods as digital assets. This broad formulation means the custody rules will apply to emerging blockchain-based assets and tokenized property that may not yet fall within the statutory definition of a digital asset business, giving authorities flexibility as the technology evolves. Mandatory Transfer to Domestic Custody When digital assets are held with service providers outside Thailand, AMLO will first attempt to transfer them to an account the office maintains with a licensed domestic digital asset business operator. If the domestic operator does not support that particular asset, the office will instead move the assets to its own cold wallet (offline, internet-isolated storage system). If neither option is feasible, the seizing official will report the situation to the Anti-Money Laundering Committee for alternative instructions. A similar hierarchy governs assets held in an accused party’s private wallet or by any third party that is not a
April 29, 2026
Is arbitration only as good as the arbitrator? Undoubtedly. Choosing an arbitrator is therefore one of the most pivotal decisions a party makes in the arbitration proceedings. In practice in Vietnam, many arbitration proceedings have been significantly prolonged because of multiple unsuccessful appointments arising from conflicts of interest, challenges by the opposing party, or subsequent unavailability. In other cases, additional expenses were incurred where appointed arbitrators were located far from the hearing venue or were unfamiliar with the arbitration language or applicable law. To preempt these issues and secure a more efficient and cost-effective appointment, this article proposes a practical, step-by-step approach to arbitrator selection. Step 1: Know Your Own Case At the outset, it is essential to develop a clear understanding of the dispute by addressing the following key considerations: Nature of the dispute: From which sector does it arise (e.g., construction, international trade, investment, banking and finance, technology, intellectual property)? Value and complexity: Is the dispute high or low in value? Does it involve multiple parties, multiple legal systems, or foreign elements? Is its crux related to multiple legal matters? Existing arbitration agreement: Does the agreement specify the seat, language, and governing law? If not, what would be appropriate considering the parties’ conduct and the applicable arbitration rules? Having clear answers to these questions in mind will help identify, from the outset, the core criteria for selecting an appropriate arbitrator. Step 2: Form Your Candidate Pool Based on the understanding developed in Step 1, a candidate pool should be formed through a structured and careful process: Researching Arbitrator Profiles At the initial stage, comprehensive research should be conducted via reliable sources to ensure both accuracy and diversity of candidates. Official sources, such as lists of arbitrators published by arbitral institutions, most notably the Vietnam International Arbitration Centre