Case law plays a limited but real role in Vietnam. The Judicial Council of the Supreme People's Court selects a small number of judgments as official precedents, called an le, which courts must study and apply in similar cases; ordinary judgments are published online in large numbers and influence practice, but they do not bind other courts. Codes, laws and decrees remain the primary source, so case law supplements written rules rather than replacing them.
For a foreign company or lawyer used to common-law systems, the key adjustments are knowing where precedent fits, how to use published judgments to understand a court's likely approach, and what other forms of judicial guidance carry weight. This article covers each, along with the limits of using case law to predict outcomes.
Why precedent was introduced
For decades, Vietnamese courts decided cases on the basis of written law alone. Judgments were not systematically published, and there was no formal mechanism for one court's reasoning to guide another. As the economy became more complex and disputes more varied, inconsistent rulings on similar facts became a recognised problem, and legal reform strategies called for greater consistency and transparency in the courts.
The response came in stages. The law on the organisation of the courts gave the Supreme People's Court the task of developing precedents, and from the mid-2010s the Judicial Council began selecting judgments and decisions with sound reasoning on legal issues that lacked clear rules or were applied inconsistently. These were published as official precedents with a summary of the legal situation and the solution. Around the same time, the courts began publishing large numbers of ordinary judgments on an online portal, with personal information removed.
Precedent in this sense is a tool for uniform application of written law, not a source of judge-made law in the common-law sense. Each precedent addresses a specific legal point, and courts apply it where the facts are similar. It does not allow a court to set aside a clear provision of law.
How official precedents work
Selection. Judgments and decisions are proposed, examined, opened for comments from experts and the legal community, and then adopted by the Judicial Council. Only a small fraction of cases become precedents; the total number is in the dozens, not the thousands. Each one is announced with a date from which courts must begin applying it, so a precedent adopted after your dispute arose may still be relevant if your case is heard later.
Content. Each precedent identifies the legal situation and the solution, with the reasoning extracted from the original judgment. It is shorter and more focused than the full judgment.
Effect. Courts are required to study and apply precedents in cases with similar facts. If a court decides not to follow a relevant precedent, it must state its reasons in the judgment.
Replacement. A precedent can be abolished or replaced when the law changes or when it is no longer suitable. Check that a precedent remains in effect before relying on it, especially after major amendments.
Fields covered. Precedents have been adopted in civil, commercial, land, family, labour, administrative and criminal matters. Commercial precedents on contracts, guarantees and penalties are particularly relevant for business.
Access. Precedents are published by the Supreme People's Court in Vietnamese, and some unofficial English summaries circulate. As with laws, the Vietnamese text is the authoritative one.
Gap-filling under the Civil Code
Precedent has a special role when written law runs out. The Civil Code sets an order for situations where the parties have not agreed and no legal provision governs a matter. Custom may be applied if it does not contradict the basic principles of civil law. If there is no applicable custom, similar legal provisions may be applied by analogy. If neither works, courts may apply the basic principles of civil law, precedents and the principle of fairness, often called equity.
The Civil Procedure Code reflects this by stating that courts cannot refuse to resolve a civil matter simply because no law covers it. For foreign litigants, this has two consequences. First, in novel situations precedent and principle can matter more than usual, which favours well-reasoned arguments over purely technical ones. Second, outcomes in genuinely uncharted territory are harder to predict, which is a reason to draft contracts that answer questions in advance rather than relying on gap-filling later.
Custom deserves a brief note. Proving a custom in court requires evidence that it is established, widely followed in a community or trade, and consistent with legal principles. Foreign parties sometimes assume that an international trade practice will be treated as custom automatically; it is safer to write the practice into the contract, or to incorporate a recognised set of trade terms by express reference.
Types of judicial guidance and their weight
Precedents are not the only judicial materials that shape outcomes. The table compares the main types of guidance.
| Material | Issued by | Weight in practice |
|---|---|---|
| Official precedent (an le) | Judicial Council of the Supreme People's Court | Courts must study and apply in similar cases; departure must be explained |
| Resolutions guiding application of law | Judicial Council of the Supreme People's Court | Legal normative documents; binding on courts |
| Answers to professional questions | Supreme People's Court | Not normative, but widely followed by lower courts |
| Cassation and reopening decisions | Supreme People's Court and competent courts | Persuasive; may later become precedents |
| Published ordinary judgments | Courts at all levels | Not binding; show how a court approaches similar disputes |
| Arbitral awards | Arbitral tribunals | Generally confidential; no precedential effect |
In practice, a resolution of the Judicial Council on a disputed issue often carries more practical weight than a precedent, because it addresses a category of cases directly and binds all courts. Lawyers watch for both.
Answers to professional questions deserve particular attention. They are issued to resolve uncertainties raised by lower courts, often on practical points such as procedure or calculation, and judges tend to follow them closely even though they are not formally binding.
Using published judgments as research
The large body of published judgments is a valuable research resource, even without binding force. Searching judgments of a particular court can reveal how it typically handles a type of dispute: which evidence it values, how it calculates damages or interest, how it treats late payment penalties, and how long cases tend to take. That helps you assess risks, set expectations and shape arguments.
Some caution is needed. Published judgments are a selection, not a complete record, and many decisions, such as those involving state secrets, minors or certain personal matters, are not published. Judgments are written in Vietnamese with a compact style that can omit reasoning a foreign reader would expect. And the 2025 court restructuring means that judgments from former district courts and high-level courts reflect a structure that no longer exists, though their reasoning may still be informative.
A practical approach is to have a Vietnamese lawyer or researcher collect a handful of recent judgments on your issue from the courts likely to hear your case, summarise their reasoning and note any trend. Combined with official precedents and guidance resolutions, this gives a reasonable picture of how a dispute might be decided.
Citing precedent in a dispute
If a precedent or judgment supports your position, it should be presented carefully. These points help.
- Identify the official precedent by its designation and confirm it remains in effect.
- Show how the facts of your case match the legal situation described in the precedent, point by point.
- Address differences honestly; courts can decline to apply a precedent where facts differ materially.
- Combine precedent with the underlying legal provisions, which remain the primary basis for the court's decision.
- Use ordinary published judgments as supporting examples rather than as binding authority.
- Present the materials in Vietnamese, with your lawyer's analysis, rather than as foreign-language summaries.
- Check whether the Supreme People's Court has issued a guidance resolution on the same issue, which may carry more weight than the precedent itself.
Common-law style arguments built entirely around case citations tend to be less effective in Vietnamese courts than arguments grounded in the text of the law, with precedent offered as confirmation of the correct reading.
Foreign judgments and international decisions
Foreign court decisions have no precedential effect in Vietnam, however persuasive their reasoning. A foreign judgment between the same parties may be recognised and enforced by a Vietnamese court under a treaty or on the basis of reciprocity, but that is a separate procedure concerned with enforcing the decision itself, not with using it as authority on a point of law.
Decisions of international bodies and tribunals may inform how Vietnamese authorities understand treaty obligations, particularly in trade and investment, but they do not bind Vietnamese courts as precedent. In disputes involving international sales of goods, for example, Vietnamese courts and arbitrators apply the relevant treaty provisions as part of Vietnamese law where applicable, and international case law on those provisions can be offered as persuasive material. How much weight it receives depends on the tribunal and the quality of the argument.
For a foreign company, the practical takeaway is to build arguments in Vietnamese legal terms from the start. Reasoning borrowed from a home-country judgment can still be useful, but it should be translated into the language of Vietnamese provisions and principles, so that the court sees an argument about Vietnamese law rather than a request to follow a foreign court.
When you need a Vietnamese lawyer
Judicial guidance in Vietnam is spread across precedents, resolutions, informal answers and thousands of judgments, most of them only in Vietnamese. A licensed Vietnamese lawyer who litigates regularly will know which materials matter for your issue and how the courts in your province tend to apply them. That knowledge is difficult to acquire from outside and is often decisive in assessing whether a claim is worth pursuing.
Before you start or defend a case, ask your lawyer which precedents and guidance resolutions apply, whether recent judgments show a trend and what uncertainties remain. Expect a candid assessment rather than a guaranteed outcome; no responsible lawyer promises a result. Check the current rules with the court or a licensed lawyer before relying on any precedent, as precedents can be replaced when the law changes.
It is also worth asking how the lawyer would use published judgments in your matter. A short memo summarising a few recent decisions from the likely court, with their reasoning, is often the most useful document you can have when deciding whether to settle or litigate.
Frequently asked questions
Does Vietnam use case law?
Partly. Vietnam is a civil-law country where written law comes first, but the Judicial Council of the Supreme People's Court selects official precedents that courts must study and apply in similar cases. Ordinary published judgments are not binding but influence practice and research.
What is an le in Vietnamese law?
An le means precedent. It refers to a judgment or decision selected by the Judicial Council of the Supreme People's Court because its reasoning resolves a legal issue, published with a summary of the situation and solution, and applied by courts in cases with similar facts.
Must Vietnamese courts follow precedents?
Courts are required to study and apply official precedents in cases with similar facts. If a court decides not to follow a relevant precedent, it must explain why in its judgment. Precedents can be abolished or replaced when laws change.
Are court judgments published in Vietnam?
Yes, many judgments and decisions are published online with personal information removed. Some categories are not published, for example cases involving state secrets or certain personal matters. Published judgments are useful for research but do not bind other courts.
Do arbitral awards create precedent in Vietnam?
No. Arbitral awards are generally confidential and have no precedential effect. Court decisions on setting aside or recognising awards may be published and can show how courts approach arbitration issues, but the awards themselves are not precedents.
Can foreign court decisions be cited in Vietnamese courts?
Foreign decisions have no binding or precedential effect. They may be offered as persuasive material on international issues, but Vietnamese courts decide on the basis of Vietnamese law. Enforcing a foreign judgment between the parties is a separate recognition procedure.