Update: 13.08.2025
In the context of deepening globalization and international integration, the need for cooperation among nations in the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions has become increasingly important and pressing. The recognition and enforcement of such judgments and decisions not only safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the involved parties, but also contribute to establishing a favorable legal environment for international trade and investment. Notably, the principle of “reciprocity” in international relations has emerged as a key standard in promoting legal cooperation among countries, particularly in the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions in Vietnam.
According to the Civil Procedure Code 2015 of Vietnam, the procedures for recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions in Vietnam are established to protect the rights and interests of the parties involved and to promote international civil exchange. The principle of “reciprocity” serves as an important legal basis for domestic courts to recognize and enforce foreign court judgments and decisions in cases where no applicable international treaty exists. Therefore, the application of this principle is not only a legal requirement but also a significant step toward deeper integration of Vietnam into the international legal system.
1. Legal provisions on the principle of “reciprocity” in the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions in Vietnam
1.1 The concept and nature of the principle of “Reciprocity” under international law and Vietnamese law
In international relations and private international law, the principle of “reciprocity” is one of the fundamental principles aimed at ensuring fair, equal, and mutual treatment among nations. Under this principle, the rights, privileges, or legal measures that one country grants to the citizens or legal entities of another country must be reciprocated in a commensurate manner. (For example, if Country A grants visa-free entry for 30 days to citizens of Country B, then Country B is expected to implement a similar policy for citizens of Country A) . Such reciprocity may manifest in various forms, most notably through the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions.
In Vietnam, this principle has been officially codified in civil procedural law as one of the legal grounds for courts to consider the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions. Specifically, pursuant to Point b, Clause 1, Article 423 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015, Vietnamese courts may recognize and enforce: “Judgments and decisions on civil, marriage and family, commercial, labor matters; decisions on assets in criminal or administrative judgments and decisions of foreign courts where the country concerned and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam are not both parties to a treaty on the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions, based on the principle of reciprocity.” This provision reflects Vietnam’s proactive and flexible approach amid increasing international integration, allowing courts to apply the reciprocity principle as a supplementary legal mechanism in cases where no bilateral or multilateral treaty with the foreign country exists.
1.2 Conditions for applying the principle of “Reciprocity” in the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions in Vietnam
In addition to the provision at Point b, Clause 1, Article 423 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015 as mentioned above, Vietnamese law currently lacks specific regulations guiding the conditions for application as well as the procedures for implementing the principle of reciprocity. In practice, when reviewing a petition for recognition and enforcement of a foreign civil court judgment or decision, Vietnamese courts may refer to the general spirit of the Law on Mutual Legal Assistance 2007 and its implementing instruments concerning the principle of reciprocity, even though these provisions do not directly govern the matter at hand. The application of the reciprocity principle in the absence of an applicable international treaty thus requires courts to conduct a careful assessment, taking into account both international practice and the specific legal arguments relevant to each individual case.
Accordingly, certain conditions may be considered by the court when applying the principle of “reciprocity,” including:
- The judgment or decision requested for recognition and enforcement must be legally effective in the country of origin, issued by a competent authority, and compliant with procedural formality requirements.
- The application of the “reciprocity” principle must not contravene the fundamental principles of Vietnamese law, and must also be consistent with international practice and not infringe upon national sovereignty, security, public interest, or public order.
- The application of this principle must ensure fairness and mutual legal treatment, reflect in the fact that the country of origin of the judgment also maintains a comparable mechanism to recognize and enforce Vietnamese court judgments, or has demonstrated genuine goodwill in previous mutual legal assistance cases.
- The application must not violate the fundamental rights of individuals or organizations under the Constitution of Vietnam, particularly those relating to the right to a fair trial, the right to protection of lawful property, the right of access to justice, and other civil rights.
1.3 Draft Resolution guiding the implementation
In order to improve the legal framework for the recognition and enforcement of foreign civil court judgments and decisions in Vietnam, the Council of Judges of the Supreme People’s Court has issued a draft Resolution since 2019, with the most recent version dated 2020 (the “Draft Resolution”). This Draft Resolution aims to provide detailed guidance on the procedures for recognition and enforcement, and specifically addresses the application of the “reciprocity” principle in Article 7.
A notable feature of the Draft Resolution is its clear specification of the circumstances under which Vietnamese courts may refuse to recognize and enforce a foreign civil court judgment or decision based on the principle of reciprocity, including:
(i) There is no reciprocity relationship between the two countries;
(ii) The court of the relevant country has refused recognition based on the principle of “reciprocity.”
Notably, the Draft Resolution expresses a progressive view by stating that the requesting party is not required to prove that the foreign court has previously or will recognize the judgment or decision of the Vietnamese court. This helps reduce the burden of proof and reflects flexibility in interpreting and applying the principle of “reciprocity.”
However, as the Draft Resolution has not yet been officially enacted, the application of the “reciprocity” principle remains inconsistent and unclear among local courts.
2. Practical application of the principle of “Reciprocity” in the Recognition and enforcement of foreign Court judgments and decisions in Vietnam
2.1 Difficulties and impediments
From the analysis above, it can be seen that although the principle of reciprocity in the procedure for recognizing and enforcing judgments and decisions of foreign courts in Vietnam has been unilaterally committed by us since 2005 through the Civil Code 2005, as of today, Vietnam has not yet officially issued detailed and specific guidelines on this matter. This has led to practical difficulties and obstacles for the participants in litigation and those conducting the proceedings, as well as different opinions, viewpoints, and interpretations when implementing the procedure for recognizing and enforcing foreign court judgments and decisions in Vietnam based on the “reciprocity” principle. Specifically:
Firstly, according to Clause 1, Article 434 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015, in cases where Vietnam and the country where the court has issued the judgment or decision are not yet members of an international treaty, and it is necessary to consider recognition and enforcement based on the principle of “reciprocity,” the request for enforcement must be accompanied by the following documents:
- The original or a certified copy of the judgment or decision issued by the foreign court.
- A document from the foreign court or another competent foreign authority confirming that the judgment or decision is legally effective, not yet time-barred for enforcement, and needs to be enforced in Vietnam, unless these details are clearly stated in the judgment or decision itself.
- A document from the foreign court or competent foreign authority confirming the valid service of the judgment or decision to the party who is required to comply.
- A document from the foreign court or competent foreign authority confirming that the party who is required to comply or that their legal representative was duly summoned in cases where the foreign court issued the judgment in their absence.
Comparison of the above-mentioned contents with the documents and materials accompanying the request as stipulated in most international treaties to which Vietnam is a party (Treaties on Legal Assistance) on the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions reveals that the cases, where no international treaty exists and it is necessary to consider the application of the “reciprocity” principle, specifically requires one type of document, namely: “a document issued by a foreign court or competent foreign authority certifying the proper service of the judgment or decision on the person obligated to comply”.
However, considering the global trend toward digital transformation and the shift to the digital era—prompted in part by the need to improve the judicial system during the pandemic—many countries have implemented e-Court models. As a result, judgments and decisions issued by these courts may be rendered in an electronic environment and sent directly to the parties involved via online means. Therefore, the requirement under Point c, Clause 1, Article 434 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015, which mandates that the applicant for recognition and enforcement of a foreign court judgment or decision must obtain confirmation from the foreign court or competent foreign authority regarding the proper service of the judgment or decision, may no longer be appropriate in the current context. In addition, requiring such a document may pose difficulties for the applicant, as the confirmation process depends entirely on whether the laws of the foreign country allow such confirmation procedures, and whether the court that issued the judgment or decision is willing to provide such confirmation.
Secondly, according to Clause 3, Article 6 of the Draft Resolution, the Vietnamese Court may apply the principle of “reciprocity” to refuse recognition of a foreign court’s judgment or decision in cases where the court of that foreign country has refused to recognize a civil judgment or decision of a Vietnamese court on the grounds that no reciprocal relationship exists between that country and Vietnam, or where the foreign court’s refusal was based on the principle of reciprocity. However, it is necessary to carefully consider whether such cases may conflict with or violate Article 439 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015, which sets out the specific grounds for non-recognition and enforcement of foreign civil judgments and decisions in Vietnam.
Thirdly, one viewpoint holds that the application of the principle of “reciprocity” in resolving matters of recognition and enforcement of foreign civil court judgments and decisions must comply with the provisions of civil judicial assistance laws. Meanwhile, another viewpoint suggests that the “reciprocity principle” should only be applied when considering requests for recognition and enforcement of foreign civil judgments and decisions on the condition that the court of the foreign country in question has previously recognized and enforced a civil judgment or decision of a Vietnamese court.
2.2 Practical application of the principle of “reciprocity”
According to the Database on the Recognition and Enforcement in Vietnam of Foreign Court Judgments, Decisions, and Arbitral Awards, extracted from the Ministry of Justice’s official electronic portal, between 01 January 2012 and 30 September 2019, Vietnam applied the principle of “reciprocity” both to recognize and to refuse recognition of certain judgments and decisions issued by foreign courts. The following are some illustrative examples from practice:
(i) In Decision No. 25/2019/QĐPT-KDTM dated 27 May 2019, the High People’s Court in Ho Chi Minh City stated: “The first-instance court correctly identified the Final Award in case No. DC 1169/2011/F issued by a subordinate court of the Republic of Singapore on 24 November 2011 as a commercial judgment of a foreign court. Since there is no mutual legal assistance treaty between Vietnam and Singapore regarding the recognition and enforcement of judgments and decisions, and Vietnam is also not a party to any multilateral convention on the recognition and enforcement of civil or commercial judgments in which Singapore is a member, the petition submitted by UMW was rightly considered based on the principle of reciprocity between Vietnam and Singapore, in accordance with Point b, Clause 1, Article 423 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015.” Based on that point, the High People’s Court in Ho Chi Minh City rejected the appeal of CDK Technical Trading Co., Ltd. and upheld the first-instance civil Decision No. 1495/2018/QĐST-KDTM dated 25 October 2018 of the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City.
(ii) In Decision No. 02/2018/QĐKDTM-ST dated 16 January 2018, the People’s Court of Hanoi City decided not to recognize the judgment in case No. 2017 Da213937 dated 23 August 2017 of the Supreme Court of Korea regarding a dispute over capital transfer between DK Ltd and Mr. Jang Jin H. The Court cited the reason as follows: “Vietnam and South Korea have not signed a mutual legal assistance treaty in civil matters that includes provisions on the recognition of each other’s judgments. Therefore, the recognition and enforcement of the Korean judgment must be considered under the principle of reciprocity pursuant to Point b, Clause 1, Article 423 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015. In practice, South Korea has not yet applied the principle of reciprocity to Vietnam, so the Vietnamese court does not have sufficient grounds to apply the principle of reciprocity in this case.”
3. Conclusion and recommendations
The principle of “reciprocity” is an important legal tool for Vietnam to promote international integration and foster diplomatic relations with other countries. Currently, the application of this principle in the procedures for recognizing and enforcing foreign court judgments and decisions is generally stipulated in Chapter XXXVI of the Civil Procedure Code 2015. However, the practical application of this principle still faces various challenges and difficulties. Specifically, the key issues include: (i) the requirement for confirmation by a foreign court or competent authority regarding the proper service of the judgment or decision is no longer fully appropriate in the current international context; (ii) whether the grounds for non-recognition of foreign court judgments and decisions in Vietnam may conflict with Article 439 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015; and (iii) whether the recognition and enforcement of foreign civil judgments and decisions must be conducted in accordance with civil judicial assistance laws, or only when the foreign court has previously recognized and enforced a Vietnamese court’s civil judgment or decision.
It is recommended that Vietnamese law should provide clearer provisions on the conditions, grounds, and procedures for the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and decisions in accordance with the reciprocity principle. Additionally, the Supreme People’s Court should strengthen training and capacity-building efforts for judges and court officials, particularly at the regional level, on the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments and arbitral awards in Vietnam. This would enable them to better understand and effectively apply the relevant legal provisions, thereby improving the handling of such requests.
ADK Vietnam Lawyers
