In a joint venture dispute at VIAC, both sides may nominate arbitrators, yet the FDI company’s board hesitates before a list of hundreds of names: choose by academic title, by industry, by nationality or by reputation? The arbitrator is the person who hears the case and signs the award; a careless choice, say an arbitrator who cannot read English evidence in a case whose file is mostly English, degrades the adjudication more than any advocacy strategy can repair. The good news is that selection at VIAC has a clear structure to exploit: party agreement comes first, the centre’s published list of arbitrators is a public reference tool, and a default appointment mechanism guarantees the case cannot deadlock when the parties disagree.
The legal framework: party agreement first, VIAC appoints when there is deadlock
Constituting the tribunal at VIAC follows the VIAC Rules, for cases beginning on or after 1 July 2026 the VIAC Rules 2026, on the foundation of the Law on Commercial Arbitration No. 54/2010/QH12. The two common models are a sole arbitrator for mid-value cases needing speed, and a three-member tribunal for large or complex cases, where each side nominates one arbitrator and those two, or the centre’s mechanism where needed, settle on the presiding arbitrator. If the parties cannot agree on a sole arbitrator, or a party misses its nomination window, the President of VIAC makes the appointment instead so the case moves on; this anti-deadlock appointment power is one of institutional arbitration’s greatest advantages over ad hoc proceedings.
The main selection source is the list of arbitrators VIAC publishes on its website, lawyers, industry specialists and scholars from Vietnam and abroad, with fields of expertise and languages. The parties are not absolutely confined to that list: Vietnamese arbitration law allows choosing a person outside the centre’s list where that person meets the arbitrator standards of the 2010 Law on Commercial Arbitration and is accepted by the centre under its rules. The statutory baseline standards include full civil act capacity, professional qualifications and experience, and exclusion of persons holding office in procedural authorities or otherwise barred. Every arbitrator, whoever nominates them, must be independent and impartial toward the case; conflicts of interest must be disclosed and can lead to replacement at a party’s request.
Applying the framework: five selection criteria for an FDI dispute
Criterion one is industry expertise matching the dispute’s root: a plant construction case needs someone who understands EPC contracts and delay analysis; a distribution case needs someone fluent in commercial and agency practice. Criterion two is real language capacity: the arbitrator must read the majority language of the file directly, otherwise the whole case slows for translation and the risk of misread evidence rises. Criterion three is international case experience: with a foreign group on the other side, a presiding arbitrator who has run foreign-related cases will manage timetables, expert evidence and bilingual hearings markedly better.
Criterion four is actual availability: a famous arbitrator booked out for eighteen months can be a worse choice than a less celebrated specialist who can focus on the case. Criterion five is verifiable independence: screen the candidate’s relationships with the counterparty, its law firm and related earlier cases before nominating. As to foreign arbitrators, an FDI company may nominate a non-Vietnamese national, including to a three-member tribunal, where the file demands it; check hearing attendance, visa practicalities and expected remuneration, because these practical factors drive the hearing calendar directly. Finally, the moment to decide selection mechanics is when the arbitration clause is drafted: writing the sole-versus-three model and language criteria into the clause saves weeks when a dispute actually lands.
VIAC arbitrator selection checklist
- Fix the tribunal model in the arbitration clause itself: sole arbitrator or three members, by expected dispute value and complexity.
- Screen the arbitrator list on VIAC’s website by industry and language, building a shortlist with a capability profile per candidate.
- Run independence and conflict checks on candidates: ties to the parties, to their counsel and to related earlier cases.
- Verify real availability: open hearing slots within the target timetable and capacity to work with the file in its original language.
- If considering an off-list or foreign candidate, confirm acceptance conditions and logistics with the VIAC Secretariat in advance.
Frequently Asked Questions
What criteria should guide choosing a VIAC arbitrator?
Five practical criteria: industry expertise matching the dispute’s root; ability to read and hear the file’s majority language directly; experience managing foreign-related cases; availability for the target hearing timetable; and verifiable independence from both parties and their counsel. Degrees and fame only count alongside these criteria; a balanced pick of sector expertise plus procedural management skill usually outperforms a celebrated but overloaded name.
Where can the VIAC arbitrator list be seen?
The list is published openly on VIAC’s official website, searchable by arbitrators’ fields of expertise and languages. Download candidate profiles at the time of preparing to file or upon receiving a claim, because the list is updated over time, and cross-check profiles against independent sources before finalizing a nomination.
Can a foreign arbitrator be selected?
Yes. The parties may nominate an arbitrator who is not a Vietnamese national, including someone outside VIAC’s list, where that person meets the arbitrator standards of the Law on Commercial Arbitration No. 54/2010/QH12 and is accepted by VIAC under its Rules. In an FDI dispute with a bilingual file and a foreign group on one side, having an international arbitrator, especially as presiding arbitrator of a three-member tribunal, is common and entirely feasible; factor travel schedules, hearings and remuneration into the plan.
Who appoints if the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator?
Where the parties cannot agree on a sole arbitrator, or a party lets its nomination window under the VIAC Rules lapse, the President of VIAC makes the appointment in its place, based on the list and the case’s character. This is institutional arbitration’s anti-deadlock mechanism: the case advances instead of collapsing, a familiar risk in unmanaged ad hoc proceedings. The other side retains the right to seek replacement of an appointed arbitrator on independence and impartiality grounds under the rules and arbitration law.
This article has been quality-reviewed by the FLAW AI Legal Council