Executive Summary
Rajah & Tann LCT Lawyers has recently submitted its recommendations and comments on the draft amendments to the Rules of Arbitration of the Vietnam International Arbitration Centre (“VIAC Rules“). The draft amendments, published by the Vietnam International Arbitration Centre (“VIAC“), predate Resolution No. 66-NQ/TW dated 30 April 2025 regarding innovating law-making and law enforcement in response to the Vietnam’s development demands in the new era (“Resolution 66“).
VIAC’s stated objective is to ensure that arbitral tribunals are formed in a professional, impartial, and independent manner that reflects best international practices. The emphasis is on reinforcing party autonomy and procedural fairness as foundational to effective dispute resolution. While the draft amendments primarily focus on enhancing procedural transparency during the tribunal formation phase, the proposals submitted by Rajah & Tann LCT Lawyers (“Proposed Amendments“) go a step further by aligning VIAC’s procedural rules with international standards such as the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. The Proposed Amendments support the implementation of Resolution 66’s directive to “ensure the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in accordance with international standards and practices”.
The Proposed Amendments have been formally submitted to the VIAC Secretariat as part of its ongoing consultation process.
Key Proposed Amendments
We outline below the key Proposed Amendments to the VIAC Rules.
- Arbitrator Qualifications and Applicable Law
The draft amendments do not clearly specify which law should govern arbitrator qualifications – whether it is Vietnamese law, the law of the arbitral seat, or the law of the jurisdiction where the arbitrator resides or practices. Under international standards, arbitrator qualifications are generally considered a procedural matter governed by the law of the arbitral seat. The Proposed Amendments clarify that, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, Vietnamese standards will apply in accordance with the VIAC Rules.
- Tribunal Formation and Procedural Fairness
The current rules do not define the authority tasked to decide whether a party-agreed formation mechanism is “unworkable” or “unfair”. International rules such as those observed by ICC and SIAC assign this to the arbitration centre. The Proposed Amendments grant this power to the VIAC President after consultation with the parties.
- Appointment of Tribunal Chair
Under the VIAC Rules, the 15-day timeframe given to co-arbitrators to appoint a tribunal chair may lapse if a nominee declines the appointment. The Proposed Amendments recommend allowing VIAC to intervene earlier, upon a joint request by the co-arbitrators, or before the lapse of the prescribed deadline.
- Consent Mechanism for Arbitrator Appointment
The existing framework lacks a mechanism for determining when parties to the arbitration have consented to an appointment of an arbitrator. Following international norms, the Proposed Amendments recommend that silence for 10 days post notification of arbitrator appointment constitutes deemed consent.
- Evidentiary Powers and Expert Appointment (Article 19)
The current rules do not specify admissible evidence types or expert testimony rights. The Proposed Amendments affirm tribunal discretion on admissibility, relevance, and materiality, and permit both party-appointed and tribunal-appointed experts.
- Case Management Tools
The existing rules do not mention or make reference to modern case management instruments. The Proposed Amendments introduce Case Management Conferences (CMC), Procedural Orders (PO1), and Timetables as case management tools to align with global practices.
- Conflicts of Interest and Arbitrator Independence
The Proposed Amendments clarify disqualifying interests such as shareholding or close relationships, and include a duty to disclose disqualifying interests per International Bar Associations (IBA) Guidelines. This aligns with best practices in institutional arbitration.
- Arbitrator Replacement and Remuneration
No mechanism currently exists to compensate arbitrators who are replaced after they have discharged their duties partially as arbitrators. The Proposed Amendments permit reasonable compensation if their duties were done in good faith and their replacement was mutually agreed upon by the parties.
Recommendations for Stakeholders
While the consultation process to revise the VIAC Rules is ongoing, it is recommended that stakeholders and potential parties to arbitration proceedings review their standard arbitration clauses to align with anticipated VIAC reforms. They may also participate in public consultations and provide input on the draft amendments.
It is also prudent at this time to form compliance teams and appoint in-house counsel to deal with new evidentiary and procedural rules once the VIAC Rules are revised. Lastly, they are advised to evaluate arbitrator profiles and appointment clauses to minimise disputes that may arise over impartiality when the time to appoint arbitrators comes.
Concluding Words
The reform of the VIAC Rules marks an important step in aligning Vietnam’s arbitration framework with international best practices. The Proposed Amendments by Rajah & Tann LCT Lawyers not only address procedural clarity and fairness but also reflect the spirit of Resolution 66 in modernising legal infrastructure. As arbitration continues to gain traction in Vietnam, stakeholders should view this reform as a strategic opportunity to enhance their dispute resolution readiness, ensure compliance, and contribute to the evolution of a more transparent and effective arbitration environment.
If you have any queries on the above or require assistance, please contact any of our team members.
Disclaimer
Rajah & Tann Asia is a network of member firms with local legal practices in Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. Our Asian network also includes our regional office in China as well as regional desks focused on Brunei, Japan and South Asia. Member firms are independently constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local requirements.
The contents of this publication are owned by Rajah & Tann Asia together with each of its member firms and are subject to all relevant protection (including but not limited to copyright protection) under the laws of each of the countries where the member firm operates and, through international treaties, other countries. No part of this publication may be reproduced, licensed, sold, published, transmitted, modified, adapted, publicly displayed, broadcast (including storage in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently for any purpose save as permitted herein) without the prior written permission of Rajah & Tann Asia or its respective member firms.
Please note also that whilst the information in this publication is correct to the best of our knowledge and belief at the time of writing, it is only intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter and should not be treated as legal advice or a substitute for specific professional advice for any particular course of action as such information may not suit your specific business and operational requirements. You should seek legal advice for your specific situation. In addition, the information in this publication does not create any relationship, whether legally binding or otherwise. Rajah & Tann Asia and its member firms do not accept, and fully disclaim, responsibility for any loss or damage which may result from accessing or relying on the information in this publication.
