Source: https://iclg.com/practice-areas/patents-laws-and-regulations/vietnam
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 04:58:01+00:00

Document:
Vietnam has no specialised IP court. Patent owners may enforce their IP rights by initiating civil litigations before the civil courts, which are called People’s Courts, of provinces or centrally run cities. A defendant’s domicile, workplace or head office, or the locality of the infringement would determine which court has jurisdiction over a case.
Yes. The parties can be required to undertake mediation before commencing court proceedings. If the parties resolve disputes with each other, the court will make a record to acknowledge the successful mediation and issue the decision to recognise the agreement of the parties. Where mediation fails, the court makes a record and will issue the decision to bring the case to trial. Mediation or arbitration is a common alternative to court proceedings.
Vietnamese citizens who have full civil capacity, and are not officers or employees in the court, procuracy or police sectors, are permitted to act as representatives for parties in a patent dispute in court. The representatives comprise the representatives at law and the proxy representatives. The representatives at law exercise the procedural rights and obligations of the involved parties they represent. The proxy representatives in civil procedures exercise the procedural rights and obligations in accordance with the contents of the authorisation documents. Persons must not act as representatives if they are involved in the same case as the persons they represent and their legitimate rights and interests are contrary to those of the represented persons.
Before commencing proceedings in court, it is common for a letter of demand to be first sent to the alleged infringer in an attempt to reach a resolution without the need for court action. If no resolution can be reached, a legal action is commenced with the filing of the plaintiff’s complaint with a competent court. A request for applying provisional measures may be submitted at the time of filing the petition or during the settlement of the case.
The court would officially accept the case after the applicant submits a receipt for the payment of court costs and/or court fees as regulated in Decision No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14, dated 30 December 2016, of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly on Court Costs and Fees. At this time, concerned parties have the right and obligation to lodge requested opinions and evidence with the court. The court may collect or request relevant authorities to collect related evidence upon request of either the plaintiff or defendant.
The time limit for pre-trial procedural stages ranges from two to four months. The court may decide to extend the time limit for preparation for the trial, but it cannot exceed six months in any case. However, in practice, the first-instance trial often lasts from 12 to 18 months.
During the pre-trial procedural stage for a trial at first instance, the court will carry out conciliation to enable the parties to reach an agreement on the settlement of the case. If negotiation between the parties fails, the court will issue a decision to bring the case to a hearing.
A first-instance trial must be conducted within one month from issuing the decision to hear the case.
The mechanism of discovery of evidence does not exist in Vietnam. However, for collecting evidence that is under the control of the other party, either the plaintiff or defendant has the right to request the court to compel the party to produce such evidence. Art. 58.2.d) of the Civil Procedure Code provides that the involved parties have the right “to read and take notes, photocopy documents and/or evidences produced by other involved parties or collected by courts” when participating in civil procedures.
In case of infringement of a patented process, the defendant is compelled to show evidence to prove that his or her products are made by a process other than the patented process.
There is no specific pre-trial procedure; it is up to the parties to prepare any evidence, including pleadings, reports, witness statements and experts (technical), that they consider necessary for proving their case.
Concerned parties have the right to request that the court provides them with the evidence submitted by the other party. When deeming it necessary, trial panels may: arrange for the audio-tapes and/or discs to be heard; and/or video-tapes and/or discs to be screened at court sessions, except for the cases in which it is necessary: to keep State secrets; to preserve the nation’s fine customs and practices; to keep professional secrets, business secrets or private secrets at the request of the involved parties; or go together with the involved parties for on-site examination of exhibits which cannot be brought to court sessions.
In general, a lawsuit petition is filed together with documents and/or evidence and an explanation sheet to prove that the claim(s) of the litigator are well grounded and lawful. Arguments are presented orally to the judging panel at the trial.
The judging panel may consider evidence, photographs and records of confirmation of evidence at the trial.
If necessary, the judging panel will arrange for the listening of audio-tapes and discs and screening of video-tapes and discs during the trial.
A party can change its pleaded arguments and/or make additional comments at trial provided that the changes to the arguments are based on documents and evidence that has been collected, examined and verified at court sessions, as well as results of the inquiring process at court sessions.
The trial hearing can last one or several days depending on the complexity of the case.
The judgment is often pronounced right after the hearing. Within a time limit of 10 days from the date of pronouncement of the judgment, the court must deliver or forward the judgment to the concerned parties.
Yes. This is based on Resolution No. 03/2017/NQ-HDTP, dated 17 February 2017, effective as from 1 July 2017, of the Judicial Council of the Supreme People’s Court on the publication of court judgments and decisions. This resolution lists the types of judgments and decisions that must be published on the court’s web portal (https://congbobanan.toaan.gov.vn) within 30 days from the date on which such judgments or decisions take effect. Generally, first-instance judgments which are not appealed; appellate judgments; cassation; and retrial decisions on settlement of criminal, administrative, civil, business and trade cases (including IP cases) will be published, except for cases subject to secret trial, having contents that are either on the list of State secrets or have not been published by the State because their disclosure would cause harm to the State. Judgments or decisions which have not yet taken effect will also not be published.
Precedent has been formally introduced to the Vietnam legal system since 2015, when the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued Resolution No. 03/2015/NQ-HDTP on the procedure, selection, publication and application of precedents, and with this resolution the first six precedents were announced for application to trial as of 1 June 2016. Due to the limited number of precedents selected and announced by SPC so far, in practice the courts are not obliged to followed precedents from previous similar cases as a matter of binding or persuasive authority. Currently, the courts’ judgments have mainly been based on specific provisions of laws. As such, legal documents always remain the most effective; the precedents are only supplemental and considered secondary after the application of the current legal documents. However, Article 8 of the above Resolution also provides that judges and jurors must study and apply precedents in settling similar cases to ensure that settlement of cases which have the same facts and events are the same.
No. There are no specialised intellectual property courts or specialist judges in the People’s Court.
(i) The plaintiff must be the owner of the patent, or an exclusive licensee with proper licensing registration at the National Office of Intellectual Property (NOIP).
(ii) Any party is entitled to request the NOIP to revoke a patent if: (a) the applicant for the patent has neither the right to file the application nor has been assigned such right; and (b) the industrial property in question failed to satisfy the protection conditions on the grant date of the patent.
(iii) Declaratory proceedings are not applicable in Vietnam.
Declarations are not available in Vietnam.
No. There is no secondary/contributory infringement provided for under Vietnamese law.
Yes. A party can be liable for infringement of a process patent by importing the product when the process is carried on outside the jurisdiction.
(iii) the product or part (component) of the product is manufactured via a process that is identical or equivalent to a process currently protected as an invention.
In the Vietnamese courts, issues of validity and infringement are not heard in the same proceedings, they are bifurcated.
A defence of patent invalidity can be raised and the court may decide to temporarily suspend the civil lawsuit. There are restrictions on such defence, e.g., the court can only stay the infringement proceedings if the defendant submitted to the court a statement confirming that the opposition proceedings are being settled by the NOIP.
(iii) the patentee was not entitled to file the application for the subject matter.
The court may decide to temporarily suspend the civil lawsuit while the resolution of validity is in progress.
(v) use of the invention by the person authorised by the competent State authority in case of a compulsory licence.
(i) Preliminary injunctions are available at the court’s discretion. The petitioner must prove that the alleged infringement is likely to cause irreparable damage or the product suspected of infringing the patent rights or relevant evidences is likely to be destroyed, if not protected. The preliminary injunctions must be secured by a bond of 20% of the value of the goods that are subject to the application of provisional measures, or at least VND20 million if it is unable to determine the value of those goods or a guarantee document issued by a bank or other credit organisation.
(ii) A court judgment that comes into force shall become a final injunction. The court judgment of the first-instance trial will be enforceable if it is not appealed to the People’s Supreme Court.
The judgment of the appellate court is legally enforceable as of the date of the pronouncement of the judgment.
Art. 204 of the IP Law provides the rules for determination of damages, which consists of material damages (i.e., property loss, income and profit decrease, loss of business opportunity, etc.) and spiritual damages (i.e., damage to honour, dignity, prestige and reputation, etc.) caused by infringement of intellectual property rights. The burden of proving and calculating material damages lies with the plaintiff.
(iv) where the plaintiff succeeds in proving that the act of infringement has caused spiritual damage to him or her, he or she shall have the right to request the court to determine the rate of compensation, ranging from VND5 million to VND50 million, depending on the level of damage.
Punitive damages are not available.
Within five years from when a judgment or ruling takes legal effect, the judgment creditor and judgment debtor may request a competent civil judgment enforcement agency to issue a judgment enforcement decision. Involved parties may reach an agreement on judgment enforcement, provided that such agreement does not violate prohibitions prescribed by law and is not contrary to social morality. Outcomes of judgment enforcement which is under an agreement will be recognised.
The State encourages involved parties to voluntarily execute judgments. The time limit for voluntary execution of a judgment is 15 days after the judgment debtor receives, or is properly notified of, the judgment enforcement decision. Upon the expiration of this time limit, judgment debtors with judgment execution conditions who fail to voluntarily execute judgments will be coerced to do so.
The court may order: (i) cessation of the infringing act; (ii) public rectification and apology; (iii) performance of civil obligations; (iv) compensation of damages; and (v) destruction or disposal of infringing goods for non-commercial purposes. Cross-border relief is irrelevant to Vietnam and therefore is not applicable.
In principle, the settlement of patent infringement proceedings before trial in Vietnam can be reached via arbitration, mediation or conciliation procedures. However, in practice, disputes arising from a contract may be arbitrated, but those arising from a patent infringement may not, while mediation is not a popular approach for a settlement of patent infringement in similar cases. As a result, the parties concerned often reach a settlement prior to trial by conciliation, followed by the withdrawal of the statement of claims filed by the plaintiff.
In addition, administrative actions are a common measure to act against IP infringement in Vietnam. Such administrative actions can help the IP owner obtain sufficient evidence materials not only for a follow-up settlement negotiation, but also for a possible civil action initiated by the IP owner. In many cases, a settlement is reached after an administrative raid, without initiating a civil action against the infringer.
The statute of limitation for initiating a lawsuit against infringement is two years from the date the infringement is discovered or from the date on which the legitimate rights and interests of individuals/organisations are infringed.
Concerned parties have the right to appeal the first-instance judgment to a higher court and contest a part or all aspects of the judgment.
The costs are calculated on a case-by-case basis, depending on the complexity of the case, etc.
Regarding civil lawsuits, attorneys’ fees are estimated at about US$10,000 and are charged based on the work undertaken.
The winning party can recover these costs to an extent depending on its claim for damages. The claim for damages must be calculated on the damage incurred by the party.
Vietnam has no mutual recognition of judgments arrangements relating to patents, whether formal or informal, with any country or regional organisation.
A voluntary amendment may be requested by the patent owner in order to narrow the scope of the granted patent.
During revocation/invalidity proceedings before the court or during opposition proceedings before the NOIP, the scope of the granted patent can be narrowed by cancelling one or more claims.
A granted patent can only be amended by cancelling one or more claims. Rewording the claims is not allowed.
(iv) prohibition of the licensee from complaining about the validity of the licensor’s industrial property right or right to a licence.
Yes. A patent can be subject to a compulsory licence. However, to the best of our knowledge, none have been granted in Vietnam to date.
(iv) the exclusive patent right-holder is determined to perform an act of anti-competition prohibited under the laws and regulations on competition.
Upon a request of any individual or organisation, the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) or other relevant ministries under the guidance of the MOST may grant a compulsory licence.
No. The term of a patent cannot be extended in any way.
Furthermore, “the intellectual property objects which are contrary to the social morality, public order or are harmful to national defence and security” cannot be protected under Art. 8 of the same law.
No. There is no duty to disclose prejudicial prior disclosures or documents to the NOIP.
Yes. As from the date a patent application is published until the date of the decision on the grant of a patent, any third party may apply to oppose the grant of a patent.
The request for opposition must be in writing and specify at least one ground for opposition.
If a party is dissatisfied with a decision of the NOIP, a petition to appeal must be filed with the Board of Appeal of the NOIP within three months from the date of the decision. If the party is still dissatisfied with the decision on appeal from the Board of Appeal, a further appeal to the MOST can be lodged, or an appeal action can be taken before the competent administrative court.
Disputes over entitlement to priority and ownership of the invention may be resolved by the NOIP. In case the NOIP cannot decide on the matter, the Office will invite the competing parties to institute proceedings before a competent court. The Office will then act in accordance with the court order.
Yes, there is a “grace period” in Vietnam and it is six months from the date of publication. During this period, an invention will not be considered as lacking novelty if it was published under the following circumstances: (i) the invention is by another person; (ii) the invention is in the form of a scientific presentation; and (iii) the invention was exhibited at a national exhibition of Vietnam or at an official or officially recognised international exhibition, without the permission of the person with the right to registration as provided for in Art. 86 of the IP Law.
A patent for invention expires 20 years after the filing date, while a patent for utility solution expires 10 years after the filing date.
The patentee can request that Customs suspend the suspected infringing goods. At the same time as filing the request, the patentee or its representative must submit a deposit bond or bank guarantee of an amount equal to 20% of the value of the goods that are subject to detention, or VND20 million, if the total value of the goods cannot be gauged.
Upon receiving the request and the bond (or bank guarantee), Customs is entitled to grant a decision on suspension of Customs clearance of the requested goods within 10 working days from the day the patentee or its representative receives the decision. This time limit can be extended for a further 10 days if necessary. Within the prescribed time limit for suspension, the patentee should consolidate its allegation and proceed with possible actions, including: initiating a civil lawsuit against the owner of the detained goods; requesting that Customs take administrative actions against the owner of the detained goods; or reaching an agreement with the owner of the detained goods.
There are no specific statutory provisions or lawsuits acting as a precedent in which patent infringement may be denied for reasons relating to antitrust violation.
(ii) agreements to restrain technical or technological developments in sectors in which the parties have a combined market share of 30% or more of the relevant market (Article 8, Agreements in Restraint of Competition).
Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN, an essential document for guiding the implementation of the Vietnam IP Law, was amended and supplemented by Circular No. 16/2016/TT-BKHCN, which took effect on 15 January 2018. Having modified 49 of the 67 points of its predecessor, the new Circular focuses on the examination of patent and trademark applications, clarifying certain issues that were not clear and generally bringing Vietnam’s IP law closer to international practice. Regarding patents, important changes include: (i) the time limit for entering the national phase of a PCT application in Vietnam is 31 months under both PCT Chapter I and Chapter II, and late entry within six months with an extra fee is no longer allowed; (ii) the time limit for response to office action regarding formality and substantive examination is two and three months, respectively, instead of one and two months as previously stipulated, and these deadlines can be extended once; and (iii) supplemental provisions to invalid patent applications, which state that if an invention belongs to a Vietnamese entity or is created in Vietnam, the patent application must have been filed in Vietnam first before applying overseas. If this is not complied with, the patent application will be rejected.
The Vietnam IP regime has been considered for amendment of its IP Law for the second time, which is expected to take place in 2019. The most anticipated change is in relation to improved transparency of the NOIP’s regulations, procedures and guidelines, as well as the status of applications that are received and handled by the NOIP. Regarding patent applications, changes to the following are anticipated: (a) search and examination results, including details of, or information related to, relevant prior art searches; (b) as appropriate, non-confidential communications from applicants; and (c) patent- and non-patent-related literature citations submitted by applicants and relevant third parties should be disclosed in an adequate and detailed manner, as required by Art. 18.45 of the CPTPP Agreement, which Vietnam and 10 other Pacific Rim countries signed on 9 March 2018 in Chile. These expectations are truly a challenge for the NOIP as the State IP management agency, but will bring about practical benefits to both inventors and the public.
According to Art. 171 “Infringing upon industrial property rights”, of Amended Penal Code 2009, criminal proceedings are no longer available for patent infringements, and therefore administrative and/or civil actions are the only options for a patentee to protect his/her patent rights. Over the past 10 years, and for at least the next five years, administrative measures still remain dominant and are the most common way for handling IP infringements because of the simple filing process, their time-efficiency, and cost-effectiveness. Over the past few years, the main reasons why aggrieved parties have been unwilling to initiate a lawsuit are: (i) proceedings being subject to delay and being dragged out by the courts; and (ii) the unclear and controversial method of damage determination.

References: Art. 58

Art. 204
 Art. 8
 Art. 86
 Art. 18
 Art. 171