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

August 25, 2015

Air Carrier Liability in Vietnam

Amendments to Vietnam’s Civil Aviation Law (2006) (Aviation Law) became effective on July 1, 2015. The Aviation Law and the amendments regulate air carrier liability in Vietnam. Vietnam is not a signatory to the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, adopted in Montreal on May 28, 1999 (the Montreal Convention). However, the legal framework for liability under the Aviation Law is generally consistent with the Montreal Convention, creating protection for consumers and predictability for air operators and their insurers.

Liability for Bodily Injury or Death

Under the Aviation Law, an air carrier is liable for a passenger’s death or injury when the accident occurred on board the aircraft, or during embarkation or disembarkation. In the event of an accident, the carrier is strictly liable for damages of up to 100,000 Special Drawing Rights (SDR) (about USD 137,000) per passenger. The air carrier cannot limit its liability except where there is contributory negligence. Plaintiffs, however, cannot bring claims for losses over the maximum damage amount if the damage was not caused by the carrier or was due to a third party’s fault. The compensation amount will be converted into Vietnamese dong at the official exchange rate publicized at the time of payment by the State Bank of Vietnam.

The Aviation Law further requires the air carrier to promptly make advance payments to passengers or persons having the right to claim compensation in case of an accident in accordance with carriers’ rules of carriage. The law also states that these payments should not be construed as an admission of liability and can be offset against any subsequent damages paid by the air carrier. Importantly, the carrier cannot “contract out” of its liability with a passenger. Any such contracts are considered void.

Liability for Damage Caused by Flight Delays

An air carrier is also liable for damage caused by flight delays. To escape liability, the carrier must prove that its staff and agents took or were unable to take all measures to avoid the damage. The carrier’s liability for damage to passengers caused by flight delays is limited to SDR 4,150 (about USD 5,690) per passenger. For baggage-related damages caused by similar reasons, the carrier’s liability is limited to SDR 1,000 (about USD 1,370).

Liability for Passengers’ Baggage

An air carrier is liable for the full or partial loss of passengers’ baggage, as well as damage to the baggage. This applies to both checked and carry-on baggage. The level of compensation payable by the carrier is calculated subject to the following:

  1. As agreed by the parties but not exceeding the actual damage value.
  2. Based on the declared value upon receipt of the checked baggage at the destination. If the carrier can prove that the declared value is higher than the actual value, the compensation will be made based on the actual damage value.
  3. Based on the actual damage value for: (a) checked baggage with non-declared value; and (b) hand baggage. The carrier’s liability for damage in this case is limited to SDR 1,000 (about USD 1,370). If the passenger has declared the value of the checked baggage at the destination and paid an additional fee, the carrier must compensate based on the declared value. The carrier will not enjoy the limit on liability if the carrier and its staff and agents intentionally or recklessly committed acts causing damage and must have been aware of the damage.

Liability for Cargo Losses

An air carrier’s liability for cargo delays, destruction, loss, or damage is limited to SDR 17 (about USD 19) per kilogram. The carrier is only responsible during a certain time period. Liability attaches to the carrier when the liability event occurred from when the consignor delivered the cargo to the carrier, to when the carrier delivered the cargo to the recipient. The carrier is not liable during the time when the cargo is transported by sea, land, rail, or inland waterways outside an airport or airfield.

Time Limit for Filing an Action

The Aviation Law contains time limits and other requirements that must be complied with before initiating any court action. Before filing a lawsuit against an air carrier for cargo or baggage delays, destruction, loss, or damage, a written complaint must be sent to the carrier. The complaint must be sent within: (a) 7 days from the receiving date in case of loss (including partial loss) or destruction; (b) 14 days from the delivery date in case of cargo loss (including partial loss) or destruction; or (c) 21 days from the receiving date of cargo or baggage in case of delays. If the carrier does not reply to or satisfy the demands of the entitled parties within 30 days from the date the complaints are received, a plaintiff can file a lawsuit.

The time limit to file a court action for any type of damage is two years from the aircraft’s arrival date, or the date which the aircraft ought to have arrived, or the date in which the carriage was cancelled, whichever is later.

Jurisdiction and Arbitration

The Aviation Law applies to both Vietnamese and international airlines carrying out air carriage operations in Vietnam. For claims arising out of international carriage involving cargo, baggage, and other nonbodily injury incidents, Vietnamese courts have jurisdiction, at the plaintiff’s option, when the carrier has its main office in Vietnam; has a place of business where the carriage contract was concluded; or Vietnam was the destination of the cargo.

For passenger bodily injury or death claims arising out of international carriage, the Vietnamese court has jurisdiction when the passenger has his or her main residence in Vietnam at the time of the accident and the air carrier uses its own aircraft or another aircraft pursuant to a contract or the carrier’s head office is in Vietnam or uses another carrier’s Vietnam head office, with which it has a joint contract. For damage claims arising out of domestic carriage, the plaintiff can only initiate a lawsuit at a Vietnamese court after making a complaint with the airline.

Parties can also agree to arbitration for claims involving cargo or baggage losses in limited circumstances. The law is silent on bodily injury claims, but it is unlikely that a Vietnamese court would accept an arbitral award for such claims. Arbitration is allowed only in disputes arising from international carriage for cargo and when related to the carrier’s liability. Also, the arbitration must be held in Vietnam.

Conclusion

As Vietnam’s economy grows, the number of airline passengers will also increase. There are now 49 foreign and 4 local airlines operating in Vietnam. While this is good news for air carriers, it also means greater risk of liability. The Aviation Law gives predictability to air carriers and their insurers, as well as protection to passengers. This helps air travel in this fast-growing emerging market.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 23, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins’ Bangkok-based aviation specialists have authored the Thailand chapter of Aviation Finance & Leasing 2026 from Chambers and Partners. This annual guide examines the key legal issues impacting aircraft lessors, lessees, and financiers in nearly 40 jurisdictions worldwide. In addition to the Thailand chapter, Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Vietnam chapter to this year’s edition. The Thailand chapter offers a comprehensive overview of the country’s legal framework governing all aspects of aircraft sale and purchase, aircraft and engine leasing, and aircraft debt finance. Some topics covered include: sale and lease agreement terms taxation lease registration and enforcement lease assignment/novation insurance and reinsurance debt structuring securities liens The guide also examines other matters with practical implications for the aviation industry’s day-to-day operations. Chambers and Partners’ Global Practice Guides provide in-house counsel with authoritative commentary on practical legal issues affecting business, enabling readers to compare legislation and procedures across multiple jurisdictions. The Thailand chapter of Aviation Finance & Leasing 2026 is available on the Chambers and Partners website.
July 23, 2026
Aviation law experts from Tilleke & Gibbins’ Vietnam offices have prepared the Vietnam chapter of Aviation Finance & Leasing 2026 from Chambers and Partners. Covering nearly 40 jurisdictions worldwide, the guide addresses key legal considerations for aircraft lessors, lessees, and financiers. Alongside the Vietnam chapter, Tilleke & Gibbins also provided the Thailand chapter for this year’s edition. The Vietnam chapter delivers detailed insights into the legal environment affecting aircraft sale and purchase, aircraft and engine leasing, and aircraft debt finance. Some of the topics it examines include: sale and lease agreement terms taxation lease registration and enforcement lease assignment/novation insurance and reinsurance debt structuring securities liens The guide also covers other issues influencing the day-to-day activities of aviation industry participants in Vietnam. Chambers and Partners’ Global Practice Guides provide in-house counsel with authoritative analysis of practical legal matters impacting business, enabling readers to compare legislation and relevant procedures across leading jurisdictions. The Vietnam chapter of Aviation Finance & Leasing 2026 is available on the Chambers and Partners website.
February 20, 2026
Thailand’s Supreme Administrative Court has issued a decisive ruling annulling the Ministry of Labor’s notification that had granted an exemption for foreign pilots to fly domestic routes under wet‑lease arrangements. A wet lease is a leasing arrangement in which the aircraft is provided together with its foreign flight crew, including pilots, and related operational support, rather than the airline supplying its own pilots. The judgment, delivered on November 17, 2025, and published in the Government Gazette on January 30, 2026, follows a legal challenge brought by the Thai Pilots Association, which argued that the exemption unlawfully enabled foreign workers to assume a role traditionally reserved for Thai nationals. The notification in question, dated December 13, 2024, authorized foreign pilots who came as part of wet‑leased aircraft to fly domestic routes. The Thai Pilots Association disputed the legality of this rationale, asserting that the exemption was triggered by a private airline’s request rather than by any statutory necessity. The Ministry of Labor justified this measure by relying on aircraft‑specific approvals issued by the Ministry of Transport and by enabling the Department of Employment to issue corresponding work permits. Arguments Presented in the Case The Thai Pilots Association argued that the exemption undermined the interests of domestic pilots and conflicted with the policy intent of Thailand’s foreign‑worker regulatory framework. The lawsuit emphasized that the notification arose directly from a private airline company’s request to operate two A320 aircraft under a wet lease and that the measure had the practical effect of displacing Thai pilots who remained unemployed. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Labor defended the exemption as a temporary and necessary response to industry shortages and part of national efforts to support tourism and restore aviation capacity. Legal Framework Thai law establishes a general prohibition against foreign nationals piloting domestic aircraft. Section
December 4, 2025
Thailand has expanded the circumstances under which state agencies may bypass competitive bidding procedures to address urgent security challenges. On November 28, 2025, Thailand’s Ministry of Finance published the Ministerial Regulation Determining Cases of Procurement by Specific Method (No. 6) B.E. 2568 in the Royal Gazette, introducing a new pathway for procuring supplies and services needed to address cyber and military threats that may affect the stability of government agencies or the nation. For technology vendors, cybersecurity firms, and defense contractors, this regulatory change creates immediate opportunities to engage directly with government buyers facing urgent security challenges. New Fast-Track Category for Security Threats The regulation amends Thailand’s Public Procurement and Supplies Management Act B.E. 2560 (2017) to add a new category of procurement that qualifies for the “specific method”—a noncompetitive, direct selection process. Previously, agencies could use this expedited method only in limited circumstances, such as emergencies, cases with proprietary technology requirements, or national security operations. The new provision explicitly covers procurement of supplies related to preventing or resolving cyber or military threats that could impact the stability of a state agency or the country. This addition recognizes the urgent nature of modern security challenges, where competitive bidding timelines may leave agencies vulnerable during critical threat windows. State agencies dealing with active cyberattacks, preparing defensive measures against anticipated threats, or responding to military security concerns can now move directly to negotiate with qualified vendors rather than conducting lengthy public tender processes. Vendor Considerations Vendors offering cybersecurity solutions now have a regulatory avenue to work directly with government clients when stability concerns are present. These solutions include threat detection systems, anti-ransomware tools, incident response services, firewalls, and security consulting. Similarly, defense contractors providing military equipment or specialized security supplies can pursue direct engagement channels where traditional procurement methods would create