China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

Recognition and Enforcement of Chinese Judgments and Arbitral Awards in Vietnam

Sun, 26 Feb 2023
Categories: Insights

avatar

 

Key takeaways:

  • In 2014, High People’s Court in Hanoi, Vietnam, refused to recognize and enforce the arbitral award rendered by China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC).
  • In 2017, People’s Court in Hai Phong, Vietnam, ruled to recognize and enforce the arbitral award rendered by the Jiaozuo Arbitration Commission of Henan Province, China.
  • In 2017, High People’s Court in Hanoi, Vietnam, refused to recognize and enforce the judgment rendered by the Beihai Maritime Court of China.

As of September 2019, Vietnamese courts have handled two cases involving the recognition and enforcement of Chinese arbitral awards and one case involving the recognition and enforcement of Chinese court judgments.

Related Post:

We obtained the basic information about these cases from the Database of Recognition and Enforcement in Vietnam of Foreign Court Judgments and Decisions and Foreign Arbitral Awards (in Vietnamese: CSDL CÔNG NHẬN VÀ CHO THI HÀNH BẢN ÁN, QUYẾT ĐỊNH CỦA TÒA ÁN NƯỚC NGOÀI, PHÁN QUYẾT CỦA TRỌNG TÀI NƯỚC NGOÀI) on the official website of the Ministry of Justice of Vietnam.

The three cases are summarized as follows:

  1. In 2014, High People’s Court in Hanoi refused to recognize and enforce the arbitral award rendered by China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC),
  2. In 2017, People’s Court in Hai Phong ruled to recognize and enforce the arbitral award rendered by the Jiaozuo Arbitration Commission of Henan Province, China, and
  3. In 2017, High People’s Court in Hanoi refused to recognize and enforce the judgment rendered by the Beihai Maritime Court of China.

More detailed information on these three cases is as follows:

1. High People’s Court in Hanoi refused to recognize and enforce the arbitral award rendered by CIETAC

On 26 Nov. 2014, the High People’s Court in Hanoi (in Vietnamese: Tòa án nhân dân cấp cao tại Hà Nội) made a final judgment in the first instance, refusing to recognize and enforce the arbitral award [(2012) No. 0671] rendered by CIETAC.

The case number is 05/2018/QĐST-TTTM.

The reasons for the court’s decision are:

Firstly, given that it was the deputy rather than the legal or authorized representative of the branch of the respondent that signed the contract with the applicant, the deputy had no right to sign contracts, including arbitration agreements, on behalf of the respondent.

Secondly, the respondent’s address was in Hanoi, but the notice of the arbitral tribunal was sent to the respondent’s branch located in Ho Chi Minh City. Therefore, the notice had not been duly served.

2. People’s Court in Hai Phong agreed to recognize and enforce the arbitral award rendered by Jiaozuo Arbitration Commission of Henan Province, China

On 7 Sept. 2017, the High People’s Court in Hanoi (in Vietnamese: Tòa án nhân dân thành phố Hải Phòng) made a final judgment in the first instance, granting the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award [(2012) No. 0671] rendered by the Jiaozuo Arbitration Commission of Henan Province, China.

3. High People’s Court in Hanoi refuses to recognize and enforce the judgment rendered by Beihai Maritime Court of China

On 9 Dec. 2017, the High People’s Court in Hanoi (in Vietnamese: Tòa án nhân dân cấp cao tại Hà Nội) made a final judgment in the appeal procedure, refusing to recognize and enforce the civil judgment [(2011) No. 70] rendered by the Beihai Maritime Court of China.

The case number is 252/2017/KDTM-PT.

The reasons for the court’s decision are:

Firstly, the respondent was not properly summoned, and the documents of the Chinese court were not served on the respondent within a reasonable time in accordance with Chinese laws either, which rendered the respondent unable to exercise its right to defence.

Secondly, there was no civil-law relationship between the applicant and the respondent, so the lawsuit filed by the applicant with the Chinese court against the respondent was groundless, which was not in line with the fundamental principles of Vietnamese laws.

For a detailed discussion about this case, please see our earlier post ‘Vietnamese Court Refuses to Recognize Chinese Judgment for the First Time’.

 

 

Photo by Ammie Ngo on Unsplash

Contributors: Guodong Du 杜国栋 , Meng Yu 余萌

Save as PDF

You might also like

How People's Assessors Work in China

In 2022, China’s Supreme People’s Court issued a report on the People’s Assessor System, revealing the role of people’s assessors in judicial practice.