Teamwork Assessment Report on Vietnam - UK Legal Profession môn Tiếng Anh pháp lí | Trường Đại học Luật Hà Nội

lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
Subject : Legal English 3 MINISTRY OF JUSTICE HANOI LAW UNIVERSITY GROUP ASSIGNMENT Lecturer : Class
: 482 5 Group
: 0 5
Downloaded by LU MY (mymycv.hr@gmail.com) lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
TEAMWORK ASSESSMENT REPORT Team: 05 Group members: 04 Class: 4825
Topic: Comparison of the legal profession structure in Vietnam and the UK Student Name Review Sign Lecturer’s reviews id A B C A B C 1 482513 Nguyễn Chí Cường X 2
482515 Nguyễn Văn Đức Dũng X 3 482516 Dương Mạnh Đức X 4 482520 Trần Minh Hải X
Assignment degree: Hanoi, ………….April , 2025
First lecturer: Team leader Second lecturer: Presentiation degree Final degree INDEX
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1
BODY........................................................................................................................2
I. Prolonged delays and backlogs...........................................................................2
1.1 Introduction to the issue................................................................................2
1.2 Official timeline vs reality..............................................................................2
1.3 Key causes of delays and backlogs ................................................................... 5
1.4 Impact on larger disputes and the system ....................................................... 5
II. Difficulty Enforcing Court Judgments ................................................................. 6 lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
III. Underutilised Mediation in Civil Cases..........................................................63.1.
Introduction & Definition: ............................................................................................. 7
3.2. Legal framework for mediation in Vietnam ................................................... 8
3.3 Reasons for underutilisation and recommendations...................................7
CONCLUSION......................................................................................................10
REFERENCES......................................................................................................12 INTRODUCTION
Civil procedure is the body of law that governs the process for resolving disputes
between private parties, like individuals or businesses, in court, covering issues such as
contracts or property disputes, distinct from criminal cases. It includes steps like filing
complaints, serving documents, conducting trials, and enforcing judgments, varying
across jurisdictions (e.g., U.S. common law or France’s civil law), but always aiming
for a fair, structured process. Civil procedure ensures justice by providing predictability,
fairness, due process, and enforceable rulings, preventing chaos in dispute resolution.
This presentation examines structural issues in Vietnam’s civil procedure framework,
such as delays, enforcement challenges, access to justice, and procedural inefficiencies,
which impact significant disputes. It offers insights and reform recommendations,
drawing on international comparisons, to strengthen Vietnam’s legal system, supporting
its economic growth and global integration, while educating stakeholders like
policymakers and legal practitioners on needed improvements. lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604 BODY
I. Prolonged delays and backlogs
1.1 Introduction to the issue * Definition -
Prolonged Delays: Extended periods in case processing beyond what isprescribed by law. -
Court Backlogs: Many cases are pending resolution in the judicial system. * Context
- According to the 2015 Civil Proceedings Code, a first instance mattershould
conclude within 8 months. However, due to the complexity, appeals or extraordinary
reviews can prolong the timeline of a civil proceedings case to 12-18 months.
1.2 Official timeline vs reality * Official Standards:
- “Under the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, a normal first-instance civil
caseshould conclude in about eight months (Article 203). The court must notify the
claimant within 2 working days, assign a judge within 3 days, and that judge has 5 days
to accept or return the claim (Article 191). Once accepted, the court typically has 4
months (or 2 for certain disputes) to prepare for trial—plus brief extensions if the case
is complex—and must open the hearing within 1 month (or 2 if justified), ensuring
timely resolution absent appeals.”1* Real-World Observations:
- “If the first-instance judgment is appealed or protested under Article 273,the
process can easily extend to 12–18 months. Under Article 286, the appellate court has
2 months (extendable by 1 month) to prepare for trial, then must open the hearing within
1 or 2 months, thereby prolonging proceedings. If cassation (giám đốc thẩm, Article 1
https://economica.vn/Content/files/LAW%20%26%20REG/92_2015_QH13%20Civil%20Procedure
%20Code.pdf(Accessed: 17 April 2025). lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
331) or retrial (tái thẩm, Article 355) is invoked, the total timeframe can stretch to 2–3 years or more.”2
1.3 Key causes of delays and backlogs
- Each year, the Vietnamese Court handles more than 400,000 civil and
commercial cases. The huge caseload and administrative delays lead to procedural
inefficiencies, and it can take years to pursue a case. In 2022 alone, Vietnamese courts
handled approximately 444,402 civil cases and resolved 386,944, leaving over 57,000
unresolved, highlighting the scale of backlog that such complex cases can amplify. Civil
disputes in Vietnam often go through multiple rounds of review, including first-instance
trials, appeals, cassation, and even retrial procedures. Larger cases tend to be especially
complex, involving voluminous evidence, numerous parties, and detailed contractual
relationships, all of which prolong resolution. Vietnam’s judiciary faces ongoing
resource constraints, including a limited number of judges and court staff across its
multi-level court system. Although digital reforms are underway, such as virtual
assistant software and plans for e-courts—the lack of a comprehensive case
management system continues to slow down processing times and contribute to
backlogs. These structural challenges hinder the timely resolution of civil disputes,
especially as caseloads grow.3 4 5
1.4 Impact on larger disputes and the system
- Prolonged civil case resolutions in Vietnam not only create uncertainty but also
generate measurable pressure on the legal system. For businesses and investors, the
rising number of disputes reflects growing concerns about efficiency, evidenced by the
Vietnam International Arbitration Centre (VIAC) handling 424 cases in 2023, a 46.2%
increase from the previous year . Such trends suggest that⁴ more investors are turning
to arbitration as confidence in court efficiency declines. For individuals, these delays
can mean long waits for decisions that impact their lives, such as unpaid debts, property 2
https://economica.vn/Content/files/LAW%20%26%20REG/92_2015_QH13%20Civil%20Procedure
%20Code.pdf(Accessed: 17 April 2025).
3 https://law.asia/vietnam-dispute-resolution-challenges/ (Accessed: 17 April 2025)
4 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380142808_The_System_of_The_Trial_Agencies_that_Resolve
_Civil_Cases_in_Vietnam_Currently(Accessed: 17 April 2025). 5
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384994146_Digital_transformation_and_building_ecourts_to_meet
_the_requirements_of_judicial_reform_in_Vietnam (Accessed: 17 April 2025). lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
division, or family disputes, causing emotional strain and financial difficulty. From a
systemic perspective, the persistent backlog of unresolved cases continues to erode
public trust and place additional strain on already limited judicial resources.6
II. Difficulty Enforcing Court Judgments
One of the most common difficulties in civil judgment enforcement is Difficulties
in dividing and Handling Joint Assets, for example:
Article 74 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement only provides general rules
for dividing a debtor’s assets within shared property, without specifying how to divide
the joint assets of spouses. To clarify this, Clause 2, Point c, Article 24 of Decree No.
62/2015/ND-CP provides more detailed guidance: "The enforcement officer determines
each spouse's share according to marriage and family law and informs both spouses. If
one spouse disagrees, they can ask the Court to divide the property within 30 days of
receiving the notification. If no one files a claim, the enforcement officer will seize the
property and return the value of the share to each spouse."
Although the law gives enforcement officers and the Court the right to divide
joint assets, practical issues arise:
-For the Enforcement Officer: In practice, when dividing joint assets, sometimes
the officer does not divide the assets directly but tells the spouses to file a lawsuit in
Court. If no one files, the officer will file a claim asking the Court to divide the property.
The division must follow marriage and family laws, but rules regarding joint and
separate property, especially real estate, are complex. This can lead to problems in
verifying the origin of assets, making the division less fair or accurate. For this reason,
the Court's decision is more reliable.
-In Practice: Judgment debtors and co-owners of the joint property usually do
not want to file a lawsuit because they do not want their assets seized. Also, if no claim
is made within 30 days, the enforcement officer must seize the property and return the
value of the share to the rightful owners. This can negatively affect those not involved
6 https://www.viac.vn/en/statistics/statistics-on-dispute-resolution-activities-in-2023-s43.html (Accessed: 17 April 2025). lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
in the judgment, leading to additional costs like asset valuation and auctioning, with
potential risks for the enforcement officer.
In addition, there are also difficulties regarding the verification of enforcement
conditions: According to the provisions in Article 44 of the Civil Judgment
Enforcement Law and Clause 1, Article 9 of Decree No. 62/2015/ND-CP of the
Government, it is stipulated: "When conducting the verification, the enforcement
officer requires the person subject to enforcement to truthfully declare and provide
complete information about assets, income, enforcement conditions, etc. The
enforcement officer must specify whether the party declares or fails to declare assets,
income, and enforcement conditions." In practice, the enforcement process faces
several challenges and obstacles, such as: It is necessary, in all cases, for the
enforcement officer to meet with the person subject to enforcement in order to establish
a verification record; waiting for the truthful declaration and provision of complete
information about assets, income, and enforcement conditions from the person subject
to enforcement is often a formal requirement. In practice, this is rarely carried out, as
the person subject to enforcement often does not cooperate with the enforcement officer and evades responsibility.7
III. Underutilised Mediation in Civil Cases
3.1. Introduction & Definition:
Mediation is a voluntary, confidential, and flexible dispute resolution process in
which a neutral third party assists conflicting parties in reaching a mutually acceptable
solution. In civil litigation, it applies to a broad range of cases, including contract
disputes, torts, property issues, and family law matters. Cases like this function better
on the cooperative side rather than the adversarial side. Even though mediation offers
clear benefits, savings on time and cost, reduction of court backlog, preservation of
relations, it has not been utilized far and wide in the civil justice system of Vietnam.
Some reasons behind that underutilization include a mixture of cultural shyness,
limitations imposed on mediation at the institutional level, and practical considerations.
The rest of the discussion will look at the obstacles related to mediation and will also
deliberate on legal frameworks that support mediation in Vietnam.
7 https://thads.moj.gov.vn/noidung/tintuc/lists/nghiencuutraodoi/view_detail.aspx?itemid=920 (Accessed: 17 April 2025). lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
3.2. Legal framework for mediation in Vietnam
In response to growing concerns over judicial inefficiencies and the increasing
demand for alternative dispute resolution, Vietnam has progressively reformed its legal
framework to foster a mediation-friendly environment.
- The Civil Procedure Code (amended 2015): encourages judges to
facilitatesettlements and mediation before trial.
- The Law on Mediation and Dialogue at Court (2020) introduces a formallegal
framework for court-connected mediation.
- Decree No. 22/2017/ND-CP: provides specific guidelines for out-of- courtcommercial mediation.
Overall, these legal instruments reflect a significant commitment by the
Vietnamese government to integrate mediation into the judicial process. By establishing
both formal and informal mechanisms, Vietnam not only aims to alleviate caseload
pressures on its courts but also seeks to cultivate a dispute resolution culture that is
more collaborative and accessible to all citizens.
3.3 Reasons for underutilisation and recommendations
Reasons for Underutilisation of Mediation in Civil Cases Limited Awareness and Understanding
Many litigants and legal professionals in Vietnam are unaware of mediation’s
advantages—such as reduced costs, quicker outcomes, and a less adversarial process—
and often do not know how to initiate it. Legal professionals often remain unaware of
mediation’s benefits because traditional legal education emphasises adversarial
litigation and fosters a practice culture that values lengthy court processes over quicker, lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
cost-effective resolutions, especially when fee structures reward prolonged litigation.
This gap is compounded by limited continuing education and insufficient exposure to
successful mediation outcomes. For example, in a commercial parties might bypass
mediation due to insufficient advice from their legal counsel, leading to protracted
litigation. The lack of targeted public awareness and limited emphasis in legal education
further reinforces a bias toward traditional court proceedings.
Limited Lawyer Motivation to Promote Mediation
The current financial structure in civil cases typically rewards lawyers for
lengthy litigation, which generates higher fees compared to quick settlements through
mediation. For instance, in a property dispute, the legal teams preferred court battles
over mediated resolutions due to the potential for greater revenue, as proven by the
cases in reality. This economic dynamic, coupled with limited professional recognition
for mediation efforts, discourages many lawyers from recommending or pursuing
alternative dispute resolution methods.
Unclear or Weak Enforcement of Mediated Agreements
Although Vietnamese law allows mediated agreements to be recognised by the
courts, doubts linger about their practical enforceability. Nonetheless, the formal
recognition does not always translate into effective enforcement in practice.
For example, a commercial settlement reached through mediation was significantly
delayed in enforcement, prompting stakeholders to question its reliability when
compared to formal court judgments. The perceived complexity of converting a
mediation outcome into an enforceable court order further undermines confidence in the process. Additional Factors
In addition to the core challenges, several supplementary factors further impede
the widespread acceptance of mediation in civil cases lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
- Insufficient training for mediators: This results in a lack of advanced
skillsneeded to handle complex disputes, ultimately undermining confidence in the mediation process
- Prevailing cultural preference for adversarial litigation has long beeningrained
in Vietnam's legal community, where traditional courtroom battles are seen as the norm,
leaving little room for alternative, cooperative methods.
Compounding these issues is the absence of widely publicised success stories in
mediation; without high-profile examples of effective outcomes, stakeholders have
limited evidence to support the reliability of mediation, which further discourages its
use as a trusted dispute resolution approach. CONCLUSION
Vietnam's civil procedure system faces significant inefficiencies, and ongoing
reforms aim to modernise the system, enhance dispute resolution, and align it with the
country’s socio-economic development and international integration. One prominent
reform proposal is the integration of information technology into civil proceedings,
such as expanding online trials, electronic filing, and adopting Online Dispute
Resolution (ODR) platforms. While technology promises to reduce time and costs and
improve access to justice, Vietnam’s infrastructure remains a challenge, with issues like
digital illiteracy and connectivity problems. The success of these reforms will depend
on substantial investments in infrastructure and digital literacy programs.
Another key proposal is promoting mediation and alternative dispute resolution
(ADR), which could reduce court backlogs, expedite dispute resolution, and save costs.
However, Vietnam’s legal culture is not yet familiar with mediation, making its
implementation challenging. Public awareness and specialised training for mediators
are essential for effective deployment. There is also concern that making mediation lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
mandatory before litigation could undermine its voluntary nature, which is crucial to its effectiveness.
Streamlining civil procedure by simplifying processes for straightforward cases
is another proposed reform. While this could speed up case resolution, it must be
balanced carefully to avoid compromising justice, especially in more complex cases
where reducing procedural steps could lead to overlooked evidence or rights violations.
Enhancing the capacity of judicial personnel is also critical. Proposals emphasise
training judges and legal professionals in technology, electronic evidence collection,
and trial management. With the rise of e-commerce disputes, the ability of the judiciary
to handle modern challenges effectively requires such training.
Finally, there is a push to strengthen adversarial proceedings in court, giving
litigants more control and reducing the judge's inquisitorial role. However, critics argue
that a shift to a fully adversarial system might overwhelm the judicial system and
disadvantage those without adequate legal resources.
These reform proposals have sparked ongoing debates. Should Vietnam adopt a
fully adversarial system, or retain its hybrid model? While technological integration is
viewed as essential for modernisation, critics point out infrastructure gaps and privacy
risks. Regarding mediation, there is a debate about whether it should be mandatory
before litigation, with concerns that this might reduce its voluntary nature. Additionally,
streamlining procedures presents the challenge of balancing efficiency with
thoroughness, as hasty decisions in complex cases could undermine justice.
In conclusion, the reforms proposed for Vietnam's civil procedure—ranging from
technology integration and mediation to streamlined processes, judicial training, and
strengthening adversarial proceedings—reflect a commitment to modernisation.
However, these changes require careful planning, balancing efficiency with fairness,
and investing in infrastructure and education. Only with careful implementation can
these reforms succeed in making Vietnam’s civil procedure system more efficient and accessible.
The systemic challenges within Vietnam’s civil procedure - namely, prolonged
delays, ineffective enforcement mechanisms, and underutilised mediation - highlight
fundamental limitations in both institutional capacity and procedural design. These
issues are not isolated; rather, they interact and reinforce one another, contributing to
inefficiency, legal uncertainty, and declining public confidence in the judiciary. When lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
civil disputes cannot be resolved within reasonable timeframes, judgments remain
unenforced, and viable alternatives like mediation are overlooked, the credibility of the
entire legal system is placed at risk. Addressing these structural deficiencies is not
simply a matter of legal reform, but a necessary step toward safeguarding access to
justice, enhancing judicial accountability, and maintaining the legitimacy of the rule of law in Vietnam. REFERENCES
1. “Civil Procedure Code of Vietnam (No. 92/2015/QH13)”, National Assembly
ofVietnam, https://economica.vn/Content/files/LAW
%20%26%20REG/92_2015_QH13%20Civil%20Procedure%20Code.pdf
2. “Key challenges to dispute resolution in Vietnam”, Written by Vu Dzung Tien
and Nguyen Thanh Minh, https://law.asia/vietnam-dispute-resolutionchallenges/
3. “The system of the trial agencies that resolve civil cases in Vietnam currently”,
Written by Nguyen ThiThanhHien,
https://www.thelawyerportal.com/careers/difference-between-solicitor- andbarrister/
4. “Digital transformation and building e-courts to meet the requirements of judicial reform in Vietnam”, Written by Nguyen Thi Thanh Hien,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384994146_Digital_transformation _and_building_e-
courts_to_meet_the_requirements_of_judicial_reform_in_Vietnam
5. “Statistics on dispute resolution activities in 2023”, Vietnam International Arbitration Centre (VIAC),
https://www.viac.vn/en/statistics/statistics-
ondispute-resolution-activities-in-2023-s43.html
6. “Some issues on enforcement of civil judgments and decisions related to credit and banking in Vietnam”, Ministry of Justice Vietnam, lOMoAR cPSD| 58412604
https://thads.moj.gov.vn/noidung/tintuc/lists/nghiencuutraodoi/view_detail.as px?itemid=920