Foreign Commercial Court Judgments in Vietnam: When Are They Recognised and Enforced — and When Must You Sue Again?

An enterprise that wins a case before a foreign court often assumes that the judgment automatically takes effect in Vietnam and can be enforced there at once. That is not the case. A foreign court judgment may be enforced in Vietnam only after a Vietnamese court has recognised it and allowed its enforcement, under Part Seven of the Civil Procedure Code 92/2015/QH13 (Articles 423–439). This article focuses only on judgments on business and commercial matters — the type most often encountered by foreign-invested enterprises (FDI enterprises) and exporters — and answers three questions: through which gateway must a judgment pass, when will recognition be refused, and what are the procedure and time limits?

A general overview covering all types of foreign judgments (civil, marriage and family, labour and others) is available at Recognising Foreign Court Judgments in Vietnam: Procedures and Conditions. This article does not repeat that overview; it goes deeper into the commercial angle: the treaty / reciprocity test, the eight grounds for non-recognition in Article 439, and jurisdiction after the court reform of 1 July 2025.

1. The starting principle: no automatic effect, and no retrial in Vietnam

Under the principle of territorial effect, a judgment of a court of one country, as a rule, takes effect for enforcement only within that country’s territory. To enforce it in Vietnam, the judgment creditor must ask a Vietnamese court to recognise it and allow its enforcement. Only after a recognition decision is made may the foreign judgment be enforced in Vietnam under the civil judgment enforcement procedure, as if it were a Vietnamese judgment that has taken legal effect.

This point shapes the whole strategy: when considering an application for recognition, a Vietnamese court does not retry the case and does not reassess the merits of the dispute. The court only checks the judgment and the file against the Civil Procedure Code, Vietnamese law and the international treaties to which Vietnam is a party, and then decides whether to recognise it or not. A judgment that is persuasive on the merits abroad may therefore still be refused if it falls foul of one of the formal or jurisdictional grounds in Article 439 (see section 4).

2. The three gateways to recognition (Article 423): treaty, reciprocity, Vietnamese law

Article 423 of the Civil Procedure Code lists the foreign civil judgments and decisions that may be considered for recognition and enforcement in Vietnam, through three gateways:

• Gateway 1 — under an international treaty: judgments and decisions on civil, marriage and family, business, commercial and labour matters, and decisions on property in criminal or administrative judgments or decisions, of a court of a country that, together with Vietnam, is a party to an international treaty providing for recognition and enforcement.
• Gateway 2 — on the basis of reciprocity: the same types of judgments, where the two countries are not both parties to an international treaty providing for this matter, but recognition is considered on the basis of reciprocity.
• Gateway 3 — other cases provided for by Vietnamese law as recognisable and enforceable.

This article covers gateways 1 and 2 for business and commercial judgments. Marriage and family, labour and property decisions in criminal or administrative cases are named only in the Article 423 list and are not analysed in depth here. Investment disputes against the State (ISDS), foreign insolvency proceedings and foreign divorce judgments each have their own regime and their own articles; this article notes the boundary only and does not go into those procedures.

2.1. The treaty gateway: check each country, at each filing date — there is no closed list to rely on

Vietnam has bilateral judicial assistance treaties with a number of countries, some of which contain provisions on the recognition of civil judgments. This article does not list a closed set of countries, because the list and the in-force status of each treaty must be checked at the time of filing — figures and lists from older materials (for example, materials from 2023) must not be used as current figures. A point of practical importance for enterprises: many of Vietnam’s major trading partners are not in the group of countries with a bilateral treaty on this matter; for those countries, the remaining route is the reciprocity gateway.

2.2. The reciprocity gateway: an open point, without uniform guidance — no fixed test

This is the point on which enterprises should be most cautious. The law provides no uniform guidance on the conditions for applying the principle of reciprocity to the recognition of foreign court judgments. Practitioners hold differing views, including the view that a Vietnamese court will apply reciprocity only where the foreign court has previously recognised a Vietnamese judgment, and the view that treats a recognition application as a form of civil judicial assistance. At the same time, the Law on Civil Judicial Assistance 102/2025/QH15 (in force from 1 July 2026) does not regulate the recognition of foreign court judgments: it governs civil judicial assistance requests — service of documents, taking of evidence, summons, civil status, legal information and other assistance requests (Article 8) — and where it is silent, the Civil Procedure Code applies (Article 5(1)). Two confusions must be avoided: the “automatic” reciprocity in Article 6(2) of that law applies to judicial assistance requests, not to the reciprocity test in Article 423 for recognition; and the legalisation exemption in Article 9 of that law applies to assistance files, not automatically to recognition files under Article 434. Assistance with service or evidence can only support a recognition file (Articles 434 and 439(3)); it does not replace the recognition procedure.

The practical consequence: this article offers no reciprocity test in the form of a rule, and an enterprise should not assume that a judgment will be recognised merely because there is no treaty, or merely because it believes the other country “will reciprocate”. The court assesses each case on its facts; the applicant should instead prepare a file that fully proves the other conditions (section 5) rather than relying on an assumption about reciprocity.

3. Do not confuse a court judgment with an arbitral award: the New York Convention 1958 applies only to arbitration

The most common — and most costly — confusion is to assume that a foreign court judgment is also recognised “under the New York Convention 1958”, as an arbitral award is. That is wrong. The New York Convention 1958 (the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards) applies only to arbitral awards, not to court judgments.

On multilateral conventions for court judgments: Vietnam has not joined the Hague Convention of 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters — the Hague Conference (HCCH) status table for the 2019 Convention, updated on 13 May 2025, does not list Vietnam among its parties and signatories. According to a 2023 paper of the Supreme People’s Court, Vietnam has also not joined the Hague Convention of 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements. Vietnam’s membership of the Hague Conference itself (since 2013) is not the same as membership of any particular convention. A foreign court judgment therefore must not be described as recognised “under the Hague Conventions of 2005/2019” in relation to Vietnam at present; before filing, the applicant should still re-check the latest HCCH status table.

Readers who wish to compare the arbitration route may consult Recognising Foreign Arbitral Awards in Vietnam: Step-by-Step Under the New York Convention and the article on the VIAC Rules 2026, VIAC Arbitration Rules 2026: What FDI Enterprises Need to Know About the New Rules. This article does not restate the arbitration procedure.

4. The eight grounds for non-recognition (Article 439): check before filing

Article 439 of the Civil Procedure Code lists eight cases in which a foreign civil judgment or decision will not be recognised and enforced in Vietnam. Enterprises should work through each ground before filing, because a single ground is enough for refusal:

1. Failure to meet a treaty condition

The judgment does not meet one of the conditions for recognition set out in an international treaty to which Vietnam is a party (applicable to the treaty gateway).

2. Judgment not yet legally effective

The judgment or decision has not yet taken legal effect under the law of the country whose court issued it. In other words, the judgment must be final, legally effective and enforceable in the country of origin.

3. Judgment debtor not duly summoned or served

The judgment debtor, or their lawful representative, was absent from the foreign court’s hearing because they were not duly summoned, or the foreign court’s documents were not served on them within a reasonable time under that country’s law for them to exercise their right of self-defence. This is the ground most often encountered in practice in commercial files: the papers proving service and summons must be complete (section 5).

4. Foreign court without jurisdiction

The court that issued the judgment had no jurisdiction over the civil case under Article 440 of the Civil Procedure Code, including cases falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of Vietnamese courts under Article 470 — for example, cases concerning rights over immovable property in Vietnam. An illustration of this ground (not a commercial dispute, and not to be generalised into a rule): Decision 258/2025/QĐST-DS of 28 May 2025 of the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City refused to recognise a decision of the Supreme Court of Singapore concerning co-inheritance of an apartment in The Vista project, Ho Chi Minh City, on grounds relating to exclusive jurisdiction. That case was not a commercial dispute and does not support any conclusion that Singapore judgments in general, or foreign inheritance judgments in general, are refused in Vietnam.

5. A duplicate judgment or pending case

The case already has a legally effective civil judgment or decision of a Vietnamese court; or, before the foreign adjudicating authority accepted the case, a Vietnamese court had accepted and was resolving it; or there is already a judgment or decision of a third country’s court that a Vietnamese court has recognised and allowed to be enforced.

6. Limitation period for enforcement expired

The limitation period for enforcement has expired under the law of the country that issued the judgment or under Vietnamese civil judgment enforcement law.

7. Enforcement cancelled or suspended abroad

Enforcement of the judgment or decision has been cancelled or suspended in the country that issued it.

8. Contrary to the fundamental principles of Vietnamese law

Recognition and enforcement would be contrary to the fundamental principles of Vietnamese law. This article does not offer its own definition of this phrase and does not list speculative examples, because its content has not been clarified in a guiding document. Enterprises should simply note it as an independent ground for refusal under Article 439(8), assessed by the court case by case.

5. Procedure and time limits: who applies, where, and how long

5.1. Who may apply, and the 3-year time limit (Articles 425 and 432)

Under Article 425(1), the persons entitled to seek recognition and enforcement are the judgment creditor or their lawful representative. Under Article 432, an application for recognition must be made within 3 years from the date the foreign civil judgment or decision takes legal effect; the application is sent to the Ministry of Justice under an international treaty (if any) or to the competent Vietnamese court. Where the applicant proves that force majeure or an objective obstacle prevented timely filing, the period of force majeure or objective obstacle is not counted towards the filing time limit — this is not an automatic extension.

Recognition is considered only upon application: a Vietnamese court does not automatically recognise a foreign judgment where no entitled person has applied.

5.2. Jurisdiction after the court reform of 1 July 2025 (Law 85/2025/QH15)

From 1 July 2025, the court system has three tiers (the Supreme People’s Court — provincial People’s Courts — regional People’s Courts), and Law 85/2025/QH15 amended the related provisions. For the recognition of foreign judgments, two amendments must be stated correctly:

• The court deciding the application: Article 435 (as amended) provides that where the Ministry of Justice receives the file, it transfers it to the competent court under Articles 35 and 39 of the Code — that is, the regional People’s Court with territorial jurisdiction, no longer by reference to provincial-court jurisdiction as in the original 2015 text. Territorial jurisdiction (Article 39(2)(d)) turns on where the judgment debtor resides or works (for an individual) or is headquartered (for an agency or organisation), or where the property relating to enforcement is located.
• Review: Article 426 (as amended) provides that a party may appeal, and the regional People’s Procuracy and the provincial People’s Procuracy may protest, a decision to recognise or not to recognise, to ask the provincial People’s Court to reconsider it.

Applicants should therefore not rely on older materials stating that the provincial court decides the application at first instance, without checking Law 85/2025 and the territorial jurisdiction of the regional People’s Court at the time of filing.

5.3. Filing, transfer and acceptance: two 5-working-day milestones (Articles 435 and 436)

• Transfer: where the Ministry of Justice receives the application and accompanying papers and documents, it must transfer them to the competent court within 5 working days from receipt of the file (Article 435, as amended).
• Acceptance: within 5 working days from receiving the file transferred by the Ministry of Justice, or from receiving the application and accompanying papers and documents sent directly by the applicant, the court considers and accepts the file and notifies the applicant, the judgment debtor or their lawful representative in Vietnam, the Procuracy of the same level and the Ministry of Justice (Article 436).

5.4. Accompanying papers (Articles 433 and 434)

The application is prepared under Article 433; an application and accompanying papers and documents in a foreign language must be accompanied by a Vietnamese translation, notarised or lawfully certified. Article 434 distinguishes two cases for the accompanying papers:

• Where there is an international treaty: the accompanying papers and documents are those provided for in the treaty to which both Vietnam and the country whose court issued the judgment are parties.
• Where the two countries are not both parties to a treaty (reciprocity route): the application must be accompanied by: (a) the original or a certified copy of the judgment or decision issued by the foreign court; (b) a document of the foreign court or another competent foreign authority confirming that the judgment or decision has taken legal effect, that its enforcement limitation period has not expired and that it needs to be enforced in Vietnam, unless the judgment or decision itself clearly shows these matters; (c) a document of the foreign court or a competent foreign authority confirming the result of lawful service of the judgment or decision on the judgment debtor; and (d) a document of the foreign court or a competent foreign authority confirming that the judgment debtor or their lawful representative was duly summoned, where the foreign court issued the judgment in their absence.

On authentication of foreign papers: the specific authentication requirement for each paper must be checked under the rules in force at the time of filing, because Article 434 prescribes the types of papers rather than a single form of authentication for all of them. By way of additional note, based on Hague Conference information: Vietnam deposited its instrument of accession to the Hague Convention of 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents (the Apostille Convention) on 31 December 2025, and the Convention took effect for Vietnam on 11 September 2026; however, under Article 12 of the Convention, the Convention does not apply between Vietnam and the states that objected to Vietnam’s accession — Germany (objection of 20 May 2026), Austria (19 June 2026) and the Czech Republic (2 July 2026) — so papers for use with those states still require checking the consular legalisation procedure; whether a particular paper uses an apostille or still requires consular legalisation depends on the type of paper and the applicable treaty, so the position should be checked at the time of filing. This article cites no decree on apostille that has not been checked against an official source.

5.5. Preparation, hearing, appeal and protest (Articles 437, 438 and 426)

Preparation (Article 437): the time limit for preparing to consider the application is 4 months from acceptance. Within that period, depending on the case, the court issues one of the following decisions: to suspend consideration of the application, to terminate consideration of the application, or to open a hearing to consider the application. The court may ask the applicant and the foreign court to clarify unclear points; where the court requests clarification, the preparation period is extended by no more than 2 months, and if no clarification is received by the end of that period, the court decides on the basis of the papers in the file. Hearing (Article 438): the application is considered at a hearing by a panel of three judges under Article 438(1), and the panel does not retry the case under Article 438 (section 1). A decision to recognise or not to recognise may be appealed or protested for reconsideration by the provincial People’s Court under Article 426 (as amended) (section 5.2).

5.6. Court fee

Under the appendix to Resolution 326/2016/UBTVQH14 on court fees, the fee for an application for recognition and enforcement in Vietnam of a foreign court judgment or decision (in the same group as a foreign arbitral award) is VND 3,000,000; the fee for appealing a court decision on recognition and enforcement is VND 300,000. These figures should be re-checked at the time of filing, as exemptions, reductions and the obligation to pay an advance fee apply under Resolution 326 and the rules in force.

6. After recognition — and when the case must be started again from scratch

Once a decision recognising and allowing enforcement is made, the foreign judgment is enforced in Vietnam under the civil judgment enforcement procedure. This article states no separate enforcement limitation figure for the case of a foreign judgment already recognised, because the starting point of that limitation period must be determined from the recognition decision and the civil judgment enforcement rules in force at the time an enforcement application is filed; it should not be inferred from the 3-year recognition period in Article 432.

Conversely, if recognition is refused — for example, because one of the eight grounds in Article 439 applies, or because neither the treaty gateway nor the reciprocity gateway is passed — the foreign judgment has no enforcement effect in Vietnam. The remaining route, in substance, is to bring the case again from the beginning before the competent Vietnamese court (if that court has jurisdiction and the case meets the acceptance conditions), rather than relying on the foreign judgment as a basis for enforcement. That cost in time and procedure is exactly what an early check of the three gateways and the eight grounds is meant to avoid.

Hypothetical example (not a real case, and not a case handled by FLAT): a foreign company wins a sale-of-goods contract claim against a Vietnamese counterparty before a foreign court, and the counterparty has assets in Vietnam. Before applying, the company should check: whether the country of origin and Vietnam are both parties to a treaty on recognition of judgments; if not, whether the file can meet the requirements for consideration on the basis of reciprocity; whether the judgment has taken legal effect and is enforceable in the country of origin; whether the judgment debtor was duly summoned and served; and whether the 3-year period in Article 432 is still open. A single missing link — for example, incomplete papers proving service — may lead to refusal even where the judgment is right on the merits.

7. Practical checklist before filing

• Check the treaty gateway: are the country of origin and Vietnam both parties to a treaty providing for recognition of judgments, at the time of filing?
• If there is no treaty: be prepared for the reciprocity gateway having no uniform guidance; do not rely on a speculative formula.
• Check the judgment’s effect: has it taken legal effect and is it enforceable in the country of origin, and has its enforcement limitation period not expired?
• Check service and summons: are there papers confirming lawful service and, where judgment was given in absence, lawful summons?
• Check jurisdiction: did the foreign court have jurisdiction, and does the case not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Vietnamese courts (for example, rights over immovable property in Vietnam)?
• Check duplication: is there no legally effective Vietnamese judgment, no case already accepted by a Vietnamese court, and no third-country judgment already recognised on the same case?
• Check the 3-year period (Article 432) and the territorial jurisdiction of the regional People’s Court (Articles 35 and 39, after Law 85/2025).
• Prepare the file under Article 434 (original or certified copy, confirmation of legal effect, confirmation of service, confirmation of summons where given in absence), with a Vietnamese translation that is notarised or lawfully certified; check the authentication requirement for each paper at the time of filing.

Sources

Civil Procedure Code 92/2015/QH13, Part Seven (Articles 423–439) and Articles 35, 39, 426 and 432–438 cited in this article; Law 85/2025/QH15 amending a number of articles of the Civil Procedure Code (in force from 1 July 2025), including the amendments to Articles 35, 426 and 435; Resolution 326/2016/UBTVQH14 on court fees (appendix: fee for recognition of a foreign judgment); the Hague Conference (HCCH) status table for the 2019 Judgments Convention, updated 13 May 2025; a 2023 paper of the Supreme People’s Court (Vietnam Law Magazine, November 2023) on bilateral treaties, reciprocity and the Hague Conventions of 2005/2019; and Hague Conference information on Vietnam’s accession to the 1961 Apostille Convention (instrument deposited 31 December 2025, in force for Vietnam from 11 September 2026); and the Law on Civil Judicial Assistance 102/2025/QH15 (in force from 1 July 2026) — cited only for the boundary: it governs civil judicial assistance, not the recognition of foreign court judgments.

Contact

For further discussion of the general information in this article, readers may contact FLAT Law Firm via the contact page or via the official Zalo account: zalo.me/0988424851.

This article provides general legal information about the recognition and enforcement in Vietnam of foreign commercial court judgments. It is not legal advice for a specific case; enterprises should consult a lawyer before applying it to their disputes.

Related articles

• Hidden Formation Costs: What Investors Forget
• Total Cost of Setting Up a Trading/Service FDI Company: Sample Budget
• Total Cost of Setting Up a Manufacturing FDI Company: Sample Budget
• First-Year Office/Headquarters Rent for an FDI Company
• First-Year Costs: Digital Signature, E-Invoices and Accounting Software