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 19, 2013

The International Comparative Legal Guide to: International Arbitration 2013 – Vietnam Chapter

Subscribe to Updates
Global Legal Group

The International Comparative Legal Guide has published the 10th edition of International Arbitration, a Q&A-style guide that provides cross-border insight into arbitration work across 53 jurisdictions. Michael K. Lee and Doan Ngoc Tran, partner and associate in the Tilleke & Gibbins corporate and commercial group, have jointly authored this year’s chapter on arbitration in Vietnam.

This chapter covers the following topics:

  • Arbitration Agreements: Requirements under the Law on Commercial Arbitration of Vietnam 2010 and enforcement of arbitration agreements by national courts
  • Governing Legislation: Main statutes, differences between domestic and international arbitration proceedings, UNCITRAL Model Law, and mandatory rules governing international arbitration
  • Jurisdiction: Arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction, parties that commence proceedings in breach of an arbitration agreement, jurisdiction over individuals not party to an agreement to arbitrate, limitation periods, and effect of pending insolvency proceedings
  • Choice of Law Rules: Determining applicable law, prevailing mandatory laws, and law rules governing formation, validity, and legality of arbitration agreements
  • Selection of Arbitral Tribunal: Limits on parties’ autonomy to select arbitrators, default selection procedures, court intervention in arbitrator selection, and requirements for arbitrator independence, neutrality, and/or impartiality
  • Procedural Rules: Laws governing arbitration procedures, procedural steps, arbitration hearing rules, arbitrator powers and duties, restrictions on foreign lawyers, arbitrator immunity, and national courts’ jurisdiction on procedural issues
  • Preliminary Relief and Interim Measures: Arbitrators’ and courts’ capabilities to award relief, anti-suit injunctions, and security for costs
  • Evidentiary Matters: Rules of evidence, scope of arbitrator’s authority with regard to disclosure, courts’ intervention in disclosure/discovery matters, rules relating to testimony, and scope of privilege
  • Making an Award: Legal requirements
  • Challenge of an Award: Grounds, excluding appeals or challenges, expanding scope of appeal, and procedures
  • Enforcement of an Award: New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, regional Conventions, steps to take by the parties, res judicata, and refusing enforcement on grounds of public policy
  • Confidentiality: Unprotected proceedings, governing laws, and information disclosed in arbitral proceedings referred to in subsequent proceedings
  • Remedies/Interests/Costs: Types of remedies and interest available, interest rates, recovering fees and/or costs, shifting fees and costs, taxes, and lawyers’ fees
  • Investor State Arbitrations: Bilateral Investment Treaties and multi-party investment treaties, noteworthy language in investment treaties, and state immunity defense
  • General: Trends and addressing current issues in arbitration

This article appears in the 2013 edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: International Arbitration, published by Global Legal Group Ltd., London. www.iclg.co.uk

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 25, 2025
Vietnam is on the cusp of a major judicial reform with significant implications for intellectual property (IP) litigators. A draft law, expected to be passed in mid-2025, will restructure the court system into a three-tiered judicial hierarchy while retaining the current two-tiered trial structure. The reforms include the anticipated establishment of a specialized IP court and a reallocation of jurisdiction that may fundamentally change how and where IP disputes are resolved. From 63 to 34: Fewer Provinces, Fewer Courts – But Wider Reach Under the new model, the judiciary will be organized into three levels: (i) the Supreme People’s Court, with three newly established appellate courts in Hanoi, Da Nang, and Ho Chi Minh City, (ii) the 34 provincial-level People’s Courts (following a reduction from 63 provinces to 34 due to administrative consolidation), and (iii) a newly created tier of regional-level courts (tòa án khu vực) that will replace the existing district-level courts. Each regional court will encompass several district-level courts within a province. The number of regional courts in each province will be determined based on the number of districts following a planned reduction. While the number of provincial-level courts will decrease, the newly established regional-level courts will be granted expanded jurisdiction. Notably, these courts will have first-instance jurisdiction over a broad range of civil, commercial, and administrative matters. In criminal cases, they will handle offenses punishable by up to 20 years’ imprisonment, while more serious crimes will remain under the jurisdiction of provincial-level courts. For IP litigators, this likely means that first-instance cases, especially civil infringement disputes, will shift from the provincial level to the lower regional level. These regional courts will become the new battleground for IP enforcement. Same Two-Tier Adjudication, Different Game Board While the judicial structure is evolving, the core adjudicative framework remains unchanged:
Read More
March 6, 2025
On February 18, 2025, the Thai Senate approved an amendment to the Act on the Establishment of and Procedures for the Tax Court. This follows the July 2024 approval by the Thai cabinet and subsequent preparation of supporting secondary legislation. This important amendment to procedural law, once it takes effect, will extend the exclusive jurisdictional powers of the Tax Court to all criminal tax, customs, and excise tax claims in addition to the court’s existing jurisdiction over all such civil claims. The amendment, while now formally approved by the legislature, is awaiting the king’s signature and will take effect 180 days after its publication in the Government Gazette. Based upon its projected publication date, the amendment will likely take effect by the end of the third quarter of this year. This development is set to offer a more sophisticated Tax Court litigation process for highly specialized and often complex criminal tax and customs claims, something with which Thailand’s traditional criminal courts have struggled. It also ensures that all tax and customs matters are adjudicated before the same court, saving time, party costs, and judicial resources. This appears likely to result in more consistent adjudication of criminal tax and customs disputes, a benefit for the Thai government and party litigants alike. Any ongoing criminal tax and customs claims already commenced with the respective criminal courts on the date on which the amendment becomes effective will remain under the exclusive jurisdiction of those criminal courts. The Tax Court will have exclusive jurisdiction over all other claims. This important legislative change offers those managing or otherwise facing civil and/or criminal Thai tax or customs disputes the opportunity to more effectively plan and execute a uniform defense strategy before a single, qualified forum.
Read More
February 26, 2025
Thailand ratified the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards on December 21, 1959, with the Convention coming into force on March 20, 1960. This ratification was a significant step in aligning Thailand’s arbitration framework with international standards, facilitating the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the country. In Thailand, the enforcement of both domestic and international arbitral awards is governed by the Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002), which is based on the first version of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985 (as opposed to the latest version from 2006). However, unlike Australia, Hong Kong, and Singapore, Thailand is not an UNCITRAL Model Law country. While Thailand’s Arbitration Act is influenced by the UNCITRAL Model Law, it incorporates certain local contexts that require interpretation alongside Thai court rulings. The Arbitration Act also confirms the authority of arbitral tribunals to grant interim measures, reinforcing tribunals’ power in managing disputes effectively. Additionally, the act incorporates principles from the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958). This article explores the key procedural steps, timeframes, and practical challenges associated with the enforcement of arbitral awards under Thailand’s legal framework. Procedures for Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Thailand The enforcement of arbitral awards in Thailand follows the procedures outlined in the Arbitration Act: Application to the competent court: Under the Arbitration Act, parties seeking enforcement must submit a petition to the Thai courts within three years of the award having become enforceable. The application must include the original or certified copies of the arbitral award and the arbitration agreement, along with translations if necessary. In Thailand, the choice of court for filing the arbitral award depends on the nature of the disputed contract. If the contract concerns
Read More
January 21, 2025
A proposal to establish a specialized Intellectual Property Court in Vietnam has been a topic of significant interest among IP practitioners for the past 20 years. It was thus a major breakthrough when the new Law on the Organization of People’s Courts was ratified in 2024, stipulating in Article 4.1(dd) that the Vietnamese court system would include a specialized first-instance IP Court. The new law took effect on January 1, 2025, replacing the Law on the Organization of People’s Courts of 2014, A groundbreaking law This breakthrough can be viewed from multiple perspectives. First of all, in terms of organization, this is the first time, after numerous considerations, that Vietnam has officially recognized the importance of the IP field and the need to establish a specialized adjudicative body due to the field’s unique nature. The establishment of a specialized first-instance IP Court is expected to lead to fundamental changes in the practice of developing and applying IP law. While the establishment of IP rights such as trademarks, patents, and plant varieties is managed by administrative agencies such as the Intellectual Property Office, the Copyright Office, and the Crop Production Department, which seem unlikely to change their functions and tasks, there could be significant changes in the enforcement of these rights, which has been a persistent issue in Vietnam’s IP law system. Thus far, in practice, the enforcement of IP rights in Vietnam has relied overwhelmingly on administrative measures over civil measures. Civil measures, typically involving court proceedings under which the matter will be submitted to a court for settlement, are not appealing to disputing parties, especially IP rights owners. The absence of a specialized court has led to many IP cases being handled by judges without any knowledge or experience in this specialized field, resulting in confusion, misconceptions about
Read More