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

April 19, 2022

Vietnam Updates Regulations on Organization and Operation of Private Schools

Subscribe to Updates

On December 30, 2021, Vietnam’s Ministry of Education and Training issued Circular No. 40/2021/TT-BGDDT promulgating the Regulations on Organization and Operation of Private Primary Schools, Secondary Schools, High Schools, and Multi-level Schools (Circular 40), which took effect on February 14, 2022, replacing Circular No. 13/2011/TT-BGDDT.

Circular 40 sets forth provisions for the organization and operation of private primary and secondary schools, including regulations on school organization and management; teachers, administrators, staff, and students; facilities, finances and assets; inspection, examination, and accreditation of education quality, rewards, and handling of violations.

School Board

Circular 40 has replaced the term “Board of Management” of the school, which had previously caused much confusion and misunderstanding under Circular 13, with the term “School Board.” Similarly, to avoid any confusion and inconsistency, Circular 40 also has removed regulations on “members’ councils,” which would typically be subject to the laws on enterprises, but are not under the regulations on schools.

The provisions related to the School Board, summarized below, are the most significant changes introduced by Circular 40.

Establishment and Composition

Circular 40 affirms that the School Board of a private high school is the governing body of the school.

The members of the School Board of a private school comprise representatives of the investors and members within and outside the school who are elected or decided upon by a meeting of the investors, and recognized by the competent authority (e.g., chairperson of the district or provincial People’s Committee, depending on the level of the school). Any changes to the members of the School Board must be submitted annually to the competent authority for recognition.

The term of the School Board is five years. In a new requirement under Circular 40, the School Board must have an odd number of members, with at least five and no more than 15 people.

Rights and Obligations

Under Article 7.4 of Circular 40, the School Board has the following rights and obligations:

  • To decide on the school’s strategy, vision, and development plan, to submit to the investor’s or owner’s meeting for approval.
  • To decide on the regulations on the organization and operation of the school, to submit to the investor’s or owner’s meeting for approval.
  • To approve the plan on organizational structure and issues related to the organization and personnel of the school on the basis of the proposal of the principal; to recommend the addition or dismissal of members of the School Board; to propose the recognition or dismissal of the principal or vice-principal of the school, to submit to the investor’s or owner’s meeting for approval and to submit to the competent authority for consideration and decision on recognition.
  • To approve the school’s educational plan; to supervise enrollment activities and the organization and implementation of activities according to the school’s educational plan.
  • To supervise the implementation of resolutions of the School Board, the management of the school’s finances and properties, and the implementation of the democratic regulations in the school’s activities.

 School Board Meetings

Under Article 7.5 of Circular 40, meetings of the School Board are regulated as follows:

  • Regular meetings must be held at least three times per year.
  • A meeting is recognized as valid when at least three-quarters of the members, including the president, are in attendance.
  • In necessary cases, at the request of the principal or more than half of the members, the president may convene an unscheduled meeting to resolve issues arising in the school. The School Board may meet by way of a written consultation. The School Board can invite representatives of other parties (who are not members) to attend School Board meetings when necessary.
  • A resolution of the School Board is adopted and takes effect when it is agreed upon by at least two-thirds of the members present. School Board resolutions are publicly announced throughout the school.

The threshold rates for requesting unscheduled meetings and the threshold votes for passing a School Board resolution are new provisions under Circular 40.

Other Provisions

Except for the new concept of the School Board, the organizational structure of a private school under Circular 40 remains similar to the previous organizational structure under Circular 13. The conditions and qualifications for the principal, vice-principal, teachers, administrators, staff, students, facilities, finances and assets of a private school also do not have material changes in comparison to previous regulations under Circular 13.

There are, however, some changes to the provisions for the principal. The term of office of the principal is five years under Circular 13. Circular 40 further states that the term of office of a foreign principal will be in accordance with the term of his/her work permit and will not exceed five years. Circular 40 also provides that a person cannot concurrently serve as the principal of more than one private school.

Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 24, 2025
On October 22, 2025, the Thai government posted a directive not to grant gambling licenses for gambling involving poker nationwide to crack down on illegal gambling activities. The directive was issued by Thailand’s Ministry of Interior to align with government policies to prevent the legalization of all types of gambling businesses, including poker as a sporting activity. This will result in the revocation of poker activities as sport and institute a strict ban on such activities nationwide. Businesses should note the new government’s strict approach toward gambling activities as the legal situation regarding gambling in the country continues to draw close attention.
Read More
October 1, 2025
In September 2025, Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused a company listed on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), including its current and former directors, of concealing material information in connection with its filing registration and draft prospectus. This recent enforcement action demonstrates the serious consequences of making false statements or appearing to conceal material information in IPO filings and ongoing disclosures. In addition to being subject to criminal penalties, such actions can impact the eligibility of directors and executives to serve and may cause lasting reputational damage. Key Legal Risks The Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (as amended) imposes strict liability for making false statements or concealing material information in IPO registration statements and draft prospectuses. In such cases, investors can claim for damages, and there are also criminal penalties, including imprisonment for up to five years and substantial fines, may apply to the company, its directors, and responsible officers. However, misstatements or omissions in IPO filings do not, by themselves, disqualify directors or executives from holding office, whether arising from an SEC accusation or even a final court judgment. In contrast, for ongoing disclosures after listing, such as financial statements, annual reports, and meeting notices, false or misleading statements or concealment of material information can result in not only criminal liability but also immediate disqualification of directors and executives. If the SEC accuses a listed company or its directors or executives of such misstatements or omissions, those directors or executives are immediately disqualified from their positions, even before a final court judgment. Director and Executive Qualifications Directors and executives must meet the SEC’s specified standards of trustworthiness, as set out in the relevant rules. The SEC clearly defines characteristics that are considered to demonstrate a lack of trustworthiness. For ongoing disclosures, being involved in
Read More
September 30, 2025
Vietnam’s higher education system is at a pivotal stage of reform, with the government taking decisive steps to strengthen its policy and regulatory framework. In response to obstacles encountered during the implementation of the Law on Higher Education, issued in 2012 and amended in 2018, the third draft of the amended Law on Higher Education (Draft Law) is scheduled for submission to the National Assembly in October 2025. The Draft Law reflects the state’s commitment to aligning the education sector with international standards while addressing persistent structural challenges. The Draft Law emphasizes clarifying institutional mandates, enhancing accountability, and modernizing governance models to enable higher education institutions to operate with greater autonomy and efficiency. Against this backdrop, we outline below several notable provisions of the third draft and their potential implications for higher education institutions (HEIs) in Vietnam. Applicable Entities In addition to HEIs as defined and covered under existing legislation, the Draft Law extends its scope of applicable entities. The current Law on Higher Education does not regulate training institutions under state agencies, the armed forces, or political and social organizations, nor does it provide specific provisions for institutions offering only postgraduate education. To address this, the Draft Law introduces the term “institutions with higher education activities,” expanding its scope to include: (a) academies and research institutes established by the prime minister, mandated to provide doctoral-level training; (b) educational institutions affiliated with state agencies, political organizations, socio-political organizations, and the people’s armed forces, authorized to offer higher education programs in their specialized fields; and (c) institutions established pursuant to international treaties or by decision of the prime minister, with authorization to deliver certain levels of higher education. The inclusion of “institutions with higher education activities” represents a significant development both legally and institutionally. In an increasingly diversified higher education
Read More
September 29, 2025
In September 2019, the government of Vietnam issued Decree No. 75/2019/ND-CP on Administrative Sanctions in the Field of Competition (Decree 75) to address the urgent need for clear sanctioning mechanisms following the implementation of the new Law on Competition in July 2019. However, after five years of enforcement, various gaps and inconsistencies have been exposed that hinder its application. These shortcomings have reduced the deterrent effect of the sanctioning regime, and created legal uncertainty for market participants. A recent case involving Duc Giang – Lao Cai Chemicals’ acquisition of another chemical company—one of the first cases of economic concentration violation to be sanctioned by the National Competition Commission (NCC) since the Law on Competition took effect—highlights the practical difficulties under Vietnam’s competition law enforcement regime. In this case, although the transaction exceeded the statutory notification thresholds of economic concentration set out in the law, the parties failed to submit the required notification. This violation resulted in the NCC imposing aggregate fines of VND 1,423,982,880 (approximately USD 54,770) on the companies in September 2024. On appeal, Duc Giang – Lao Cai Chemicals argued that the chairman of the NCC was legally entitled to issue a warning as the key punishment instead of a monetary penalty. However, the chairman rejected the appeal, citing Article 14 of Decree 75, under which the specific penalty and level for “failure to notify economic concentration” is a fine, not a warning. While the chairman of the NCC is generally empowered to impose penalties, a warning cannot be applied if the specific regulation for a particular violation does not provide for it as a sanction. This example shows the inadequacy and inconsistency of the regulations on penalties for violations of competition law, and underscores the need for an amendment of Decree 75 to resolve such conflicts
Read More