Tiếng Việt
中文 (中国)
日本語
In the process of resolving civil cases in Vietnam, the temporary suspension of case resolution is an important procedural measure, often applied when factors arise that affect the continuation of adjudication.
The temporary suspension of civil case resolution not only protects the legitimate rights and interests of the parties involved but also ensures transparency and fairness in the judicial process. However, not everyone fully understands the regulations or the situations where temporary suspension of civil cases is applied under Vietnamese law. Therefore, thoroughly understanding this issue is essential to safeguard the rights of litigants and enhance legal awareness within the community.
Definition and Legal Provisions Regarding Temporary Suspension of Civil Case Resolution
The temporary suspension of civil case resolution is a measure applied by the court to pause the adjudication process for a certain period. The legal provisions regarding cases of temporary suspension are detailed in Vietnam’s Civil Procedure Code, aimed at ensuring that case resolution proceeds transparently, fairly, and reasonably.
According to Clause 1, Article 214 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015, No. 92/2015/QH13 (“Civil Procedure Code 2015”), specific situations allow courts to decide on the temporary suspension of civil cases to ensure fairness and reasonableness in proceedings.
Firstly, when the plaintiff, defendant, or their representative passes away but their rights and obligations can still be transferred, time is needed to identify the heir to protect the relevant parties’ interests.
Additionally, if a party to the case suffers from a mental illness or another condition that renders them incapable of awareness or control over their actions, the case will also be temporarily suspended until their health improves or an appropriate decision regarding representation is made.
Another reason for suspension is the need to await the outcome of another case or a decision from a competent state agency directly related to the current case, ensuring accuracy and coherence in adjudication. Similarly, if an assessment result or judicial delegation from abroad cannot be obtained immediately, the proceedings will be suspended to await this outcome.
Furthermore, a party’s absence due to force majeure or objective obstacles without a valid representative, or their failure to appear following a second summons without legitimate reasons, may also serve as grounds for case suspension. Finally, if there are changes in legal provisions directly related to the case requiring guidance from competent authorities, the court may suspend the case to ensure compliance with new laws.
All these cases aim to protect the legitimate rights of litigants and ensure that court decisions are made on a reasonable basis, with full information and in accordance with current law.
Distinction Between Temporary Suspension and Termination of Civil Case Resolution
In civil law, the concepts of temporary suspension and termination of civil case resolution carry different meanings and legal consequences, often misunderstood or conflated.
Temporary suspension of civil case resolution refers to a decision to pause the adjudication process for a certain period due to objective reasons that prevent the court from continuing the trial at that time, as analyzed above.
In contrast, termination of civil case resolution is a decision to permanently end the process of resolving the case. Once a termination decision is issued, the case will not be further resolved, nor can it be refiled, except in specific cases allowed by law.
This typically occurs when there are no longer grounds to continue adjudication. For instance, if the litigants voluntarily mediate and reach an agreement to resolve the dispute, there is no need for the case to proceed. Similarly, if the dispute is beyond the court’s jurisdiction, termination is necessary to avoid violating legal provisions regarding jurisdiction.
The legal consequence of termination is that the case is removed from the court’s docket, and the parties are not entitled to refile the case with the same content. This ensures stability and effectiveness of the termination decision, affirming that disputes have been definitively resolved.
Article 217 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015 specifies cases of termination of civil case resolution, including situations such as the death of the plaintiff or defendant without inheritance of their rights and obligations, withdrawal of the entire claim by the plaintiff, failure to meet advance payment requirements for procedural costs, or when a party invokes the statute of limitations before the first-instance court issues a judgment or decision, and the statute of limitations has expired, among others.
A common scenario for termination is when the plaintiff withdraws the entire lawsuit or dispute resolution request. This often happens during mediation or when the parties reach an out-of-court settlement or due to other objective reasons leading the plaintiff to voluntarily withdraw the case. For example, in a contractual dispute, the parties may reach an agreement, eliminating the need for court intervention.
When the court decides to terminate a case, the parties involved are notified of the decision and have the right to appeal if they disagree, as stipulated in Article 271 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015. The termination decision is legally effective but may allow for reinstatement of the case if there are changes in circumstances or legal conditions.
Termination of a case can impact the parties’ rights and interests, so each party should be aware of their rights and obligations during the proceedings.
Legal Considerations on the Temporary Suspension of Civil Cases
In the process of resolving civil cases, courts often issue decisions to temporarily suspend cases to gather additional evidence or relevant documents from competent authorities to ensure a well-founded basis for adjudication.
A typical example is when Vietnamese courts temporarily suspend a case to await confirmation of information submitted by the parties, a common practice in disputes over land and real estate. These cases often involve undocumented claims, such as handwritten agreements on A4 paper, signed without notarization or verification, rather than official certificates.
In such instances, courts must temporarily suspend the case to await input from the district People’s Committee regarding the issuance of land use rights certificates to the parties involved. During the suspension period, the disputing parties retain the right to mutually resolve the dispute. If the plaintiff withdraws all claims, the defendant does not file a counterclaim, and no third party asserts an independent claim, the court may consider issuing a decision to terminate the case.
However, current legislation does not explicitly regulate this situation. Under the existing process, even if the parties reach an agreement, the court is still required to issue a decision to resume the case before issuing a decision to terminate it. This creates unnecessary administrative procedures, wasting time, resources, and effort, despite not contravening the legal spirit or procedural efficiency.
As this is a common scenario, often occurring when the suspension period is extended and the parties conduct dispute resolution independently to avoid prolonged conflict, legal experts in Vietnam are divided into two perspectives on the issue.
The first viewpoint asserts that during a suspension, the presiding judge is not allowed to perform any procedural actions. This means that to issue a decision to terminate the case, the judge must first decide to resume it before issuing a termination decision.
According to this reasoning, a temporary suspension is based on a specific reason, and as long as that reason persists, the court cannot bypass it and must address the suspension procedures first. Article 216 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015 stipulates that only when the reason for suspension no longer exists can the court issue a decision to resume the case. After resumption, the court can then consider termination if the plaintiff has withdrawn their claims.
Conversely, the second viewpoint argues that in situations where the plaintiff has withdrawn all claims and no other parties have remaining demands, a decision to resume the case is unnecessary. This perspective emphasizes time and cost efficiency for all parties when the case no longer has grounds for continuation.
Proponents of this view argue that since the plaintiff has withdrawn their claims, there is no longer a dispute to resolve. Thus, the judge can rely on Point c, Clause 1, Article 217 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015 to issue a decision to terminate the case without issuing a resumption decision.
In the spirit of upholding the rule of law and ensuring procedural efficiency, minimizing unnecessary and cumbersome procedures while protecting citizens’ rights, this article aligns with the second viewpoint. It advocates that judges should issue a decision to terminate civil cases without first issuing a resumption decision when the plaintiff has withdrawn all claims and the defendant has no counterclaims.
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.
