Tiếng Việt
中文 (中国)
日本語
Mediation is increasingly becoming a strategic choice for resolving international commercial disputes. However, its true value lies not in reaching a settlement, but in its ability to transform that settlement into an effectively enforceable instrument. As Vietnam continues its deep international integration, improving the legal framework governing mediation is not only an internal necessity but also a prerequisite for enhancing the attractiveness of its business environment.
Introduction
International commercial disputes are often complex due to the interaction of multiple legal systems, differences in language and culture, and particularly the fact that the assets of the obligated party may be located in multiple jurisdictions. These factors significantly increase dispute resolution costs, prolong the resolution process, and create substantial risks during the enforcement stage.
Against this backdrop, mediation has emerged as a flexible mechanism that enables the parties to exercise greater control over the dispute resolution process, preserve commercial relationships, and minimize confrontation. Unlike adjudicative methods, mediation is based on mutual consent, thereby helping preserve the value of commercial transactions and reduce losses arising from legal conflicts.
However, the very fact that mediation does not produce a coercively enforceable decision gives rise to one of its fundamental challenges: a settlement agreement may not ultimately be enforced in practice. This concern is particularly significant in cross-border disputes, where enforcement depends on multiple legal systems.
Accordingly, the issue is not merely to encourage parties to choose mediation, but also to design a legal framework that is sufficiently robust to ensure that mediated settlement agreements can be recognized and enforced effectively, consistently, and predictably.
Vietnam’s Legal Framework and Practice on Mediation
In Vietnam, mediation is recognized as a dispute resolution method based on the voluntary agreement and mutual consent of the parties, with the assistance of a neutral third party. This characteristic provides considerable flexibility and helps preserve commercial relationships, while simultaneously creating the need for mechanisms to convert mediated settlement agreements into enforceable instruments.
The current legal framework reflects a policy of encouraging the development of mediation through multiple parallel mechanisms. The parties may choose mediation during arbitral proceedings, independent commercial mediation, or apply to the court for recognition of an out-of-court mediated settlement. This diversity creates a multi-layered legal framework, allowing flexibility in selecting an appropriate dispute resolution mechanism.
Among these mechanisms, mediation conducted during arbitral proceedings has a clear advantage in terms of enforceability, as the settlement agreement may be recorded in the form of an arbitral award and enforced in accordance with the law. This significantly reduces the risk of non-compliance with the settlement agreement, particularly in disputes involving foreign elements.
At the same time, commercial mediation under the specialized legal framework emphasizes the role of an independent mediator and the principle of confidentiality, thereby creating favorable conditions for the parties to reach a settlement in good faith. Once recognized by the court, such a settlement may become an enforceable instrument, thereby enhancing the practical effectiveness of mediation.
Nevertheless, the effectiveness of these mechanisms continues to depend on the clarity and consistency of legal interpretation and application. In practice, differences in interpretation and implementation among competent authorities may reduce legal predictability, thereby affecting the confidence of businesses operating in Vietnam when selecting mediation as a dispute resolution method in the international commercial context.
Foreign investors conducting business in Vietnam should consider consulting ASL LAW for tailored Legal Advice on Business oversea that addresses their specific commercial and operational requirements.
Mediation During Arbitral Proceedings
Mediation during arbitral proceedings is a mechanism that allows the parties to resolve disputes through negotiation with the assistance of the arbitral tribunal during the course of the proceedings. The distinctive feature of this mechanism is that mediation is not separated from the arbitral process but is instead flexibly integrated into the resolution of the dispute.
If the parties reach a settlement, the terms of the settlement may be recorded in the form of an arbitral award by consent. Such an award has the same legal effect as an ordinary arbitral award and may be enforced in accordance with the law, including internationally through mechanisms for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.
The greatest advantage of this mechanism lies in its enforceability, thereby overcoming the inherent weakness of mediation. At the same time, permitting mediation to take place at any stage before the issuance of the arbitral award enables the parties to save both time and costs.
However, this mechanism also presents challenges concerning the independence of arbitrators, as they simultaneously perform two roles: adjudicating the dispute and facilitating mediation. This overlap may give rise to concerns regarding impartiality, particularly where mediation fails and the arbitral tribunal subsequently proceeds to issue an award.
Commercial Mediation Under the Specialized Legal Framework
Commercial mediation in Vietnam is structured as an independent dispute resolution method in which the mediator acts as a neutral intermediary assisting the parties in reaching a settlement without being directly connected to any judicial or arbitral proceedings. This mechanism emphasizes flexibility and the parties’ autonomy in choosing how to resolve their disputes.
The fundamental principles of commercial mediation include voluntariness, equality, and confidentiality. The parties retain full control over the content of their settlement agreement, provided that it does not violate prohibitive provisions of law, is not contrary to social morality, and does not infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of third parties.
Mediators must satisfy prescribed standards relating to competence, independence, and professional expertise in order to ensure the objectivity and effectiveness of the mediation process. Their role is not to render a decision but to assist the parties in identifying their respective interests and finding an appropriate solution.
A successful mediated settlement agreement is legally binding under civil law. In particular, once recognized by the court, such an agreement may become an enforceable instrument, thereby enhancing the practical effectiveness of mediation. However, the requirement to undergo court recognition procedures may also result in additional time and costs if those procedures are not designed appropriately.
Recognition and Enforcement of Mediated Settlement Agreements
The mechanism for recognition and enforcement plays a central role in ensuring the practical value of mediation. In Vietnam, the law permits the parties to request the court to recognize an out-of-court mediated settlement agreement, provided that the agreement has been concluded on a voluntary basis, is lawful, and has been entered into by the proper parties.
Once recognized, the mediated settlement agreement becomes immediately enforceable and is implemented in accordance with the laws governing civil judgment enforcement. This serves as an important mechanism for transforming a consensual agreement into an enforceable obligation, which is particularly significant in international commercial disputes.
In addition to the court-based mechanism, practice has also seen a growing trend toward combining mediation and arbitration, whereby the mediated settlement agreement is recorded in the form of an arbitral award by consent of the parties. This approach enables the parties to take advantage of international enforcement mechanisms applicable to arbitral awards, thereby enhancing enforceability where assets are located outside the territory of Vietnam.
However, the effectiveness of these mechanisms largely depends on procedural design and their practical application. In the absence of clarity and consistency, the recognition and enforcement process may become an obstacle, reducing the attractiveness of mediation in international commercial transactions.
International Comparison
The United States’ approach to commercial mediation focuses on treating a settlement agreement with the help of contract consultancy as a civil contract between the parties rather than as an adjudicative outcome. Consequently, enforceability does not arise automatically but depends on whether the parties have established appropriate procedures to bring the settlement agreement within the jurisdiction of the court.
In practice, if the parties neither request the court to retain jurisdiction nor incorporate the settlement terms into the order concluding the proceedings, enforcement may require the commencement of a new action for breach of contract. This approach demonstrates that the key issue lies not in the number of mediation mechanisms available but in the legal techniques used to ensure the enforceability of settlement agreements.
By contrast, Singapore has developed a more systematic model, focusing on establishing an “enforcement infrastructure” for mediation. The law permits mediated settlement agreements to be recorded as court orders, thereby giving them the same enforceable effect as court judgments. This mechanism minimizes the risk of recurring disputes and provides greater certainty for the parties.
In addition, Singapore has strongly developed a hybrid mediation-arbitration model, allowing mediated settlement agreements to be converted into International Arbitration awards in Singapore by agreement of the parties. As a result, the parties are able to utilize international mechanisms for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, which is particularly beneficial where assets are located in multiple jurisdictions.
At the international level, the adoption of the Singapore Convention on Mediation reflects the trend toward establishing a unified mechanism for the recognition and enforcement of international mediated settlement agreements. A notable feature of this mechanism is that it permits the direct enforcement of settlement agreements without requiring their conversion into arbitral awards or court judgments, thereby reducing costs and increasing predictability in cross-border transactions.
Recommendations for Improving Vietnamese Law
One important requirement is to enhance the transparency and consistency of the procedures for recognizing out-of-court mediated settlement agreements. Clarifying the applicable conditions, documentation requirements, and evaluation criteria will help reduce differences in legal application among local jurisdictions, thereby increasing predictability for enterprises doing business in Vietnam when choosing mediation.
At the same time, greater attention should be given to the professionalization of mediators and mechanisms for managing conflicts of interest. The parties’ confidence in mediation depends largely on the mediator’s independence and competence. Accordingly, standardizing professional ethics and establishing mechanisms for addressing violations are indispensable.
For disputes involving foreign elements, encouraging the adoption of hybrid mediation-arbitration models may create a significant breakthrough in enforceability. By converting mediated settlement agreements into arbitral awards, the parties may take advantage of international enforcement mechanisms, thereby minimizing risks where assets are located outside the territory of Vietnam.
At the policy level, Vietnam should consider a roadmap for adopting and incorporating international standards relating to the enforcement of mediated settlement agreements into domestic law. Participation in international mechanisms would not only improve enforcement effectiveness but also enhance Vietnam’s position within the global commercial dispute resolution system.
This process should be implemented on the basis of balancing the requirements of international integration with the protection of the domestic legal order, while ensuring consistent coordination between the existing court and arbitration mechanisms in order to avoid overlap and improve practical enforcement effectiveness.
ASL Law is a leading full-service and independent Vietnamese law firm made up of experienced and talented lawyers. ASL Law is ranked as the top tier Law Firm in Vietnam by Legal500, Asia Law, WTR, and Asia Business Law Journal. Based in both Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam, the firm’s main purpose is to provide the most practical, efficient and lawful advice to its domestic and international clients. If we can be of assistance, please email to [email protected].
ASL LAW is the top-tier Vietnam law firm for litigation and dispute resolution. If you need any advice, please contact us for further information or collaboration.
