A contractor ‘blacklist’ in bidding is in substance a decision banning participation in bidding activities: a sanction of the Bidding Law 22/2023/QH15 imposed on a contractor committing prohibited acts such as fraud, bid rigging, obstructing bidding activities or seriously breaching contractual obligations within the regulated scope. It is entirely different from the investor warning list in foreign investment management — two mechanisms of two different legal systems, with different consequences, which must not be merged when advising an FDI enterprise.
Applicable legal framework
The direct consequence of a ban decision is that the contractor may not join bidding activities within the scope and period stated in the decision — under Clause 2, Article 87 of the Bidding Law 22/2023/QH15, the ban lasts from 06 months to 05 years depending on the act and its gravity, fixed by the competent person issuing the ban in each case. Ban decisions are published on the National E-procurement System, so every procuring entity can see them; for a foreign contractor, a ban in Vietnam is also information the parent group must assess in global compliance governance, because it reflects fraudulent conduct rather than a mere administrative fine.
Applying the rules
To get off the list, the contractor has two sequential routes: petition and complain against the ban decision under the bidding petition mechanism and the law on complaints, and file an administrative lawsuit if the decision is considered unlawful. A practical point: a complaint does not automatically suspend the ban’s effect, so while complaining the contractor remains excluded from packages — the complaint file must therefore attack the decision’s grounds (whether the act falls in the prohibited group, the issuer’s authority, whether the ban period is proportionate) rather than merely plead for leniency. When the ban period in the decision expires, bidding eligibility is restored without any separate ‘name removal’ procedure.
Practical recommendations
Whether a blacklisted parent affects its subsidiary is answered by the separate-legal-person principle: the ban applies to the contractor named in the decision. A subsidiary, as a separate legal person, is not automatically banned with it. But three grey zones must be flagged: a subsidiary that joined the prohibited act is sanctioned independently; a subsidiary bidding on the capacity and experience of a banned parent may be assessed as dishonest; and private-sector procuring entities are fully entitled to exclude a bidder for group compliance reasons even though bidding law does not ban it. Saying ‘no effect at all’ would be irresponsible advice.
Frequently asked questions
What happens if a contractor is put on the bidding blacklist?
The enterprise is banned from bidding activities within the scope and period stated in the ban decision under the Bidding Law 22/2023/QH15, and the decision is published on the National E-procurement System for every procuring entity to check.
How long does the bidding ban last?
From 06 months to 05 years depending on the act and its gravity, fixed by the competent person issuing the ban in each case under Clause 2, Article 87 of the Bidding Law 22/2023/QH15.
Where can one appeal to be removed from the blacklist?
Petition and complain against the ban decision under the bidding petition mechanism and the law on complaints, or file an administrative lawsuit if the decision is considered unlawful; note that a complaint does not automatically suspend the ban’s effect.
If the parent company is blacklisted, is the subsidiary affected?
Not automatically: the ban applies only to the named entity, and the subsidiary is a separate legal person. But a subsidiary joining the same act is sanctioned separately, and bidding on a banned parent’s capacity may be assessed as dishonest.
This article has been quality-reviewed by the FLAW AI Legal Council