CYIL vol. 15 (2024)

LANH DINH CAO, TRINH THI HONG NGUYEN legislative intentions have not yet been clearly explained or exemplified by court decisions so far. Legal drafting projects usually require a comparative law report but they have questionable content. Academic contribution and manipulation seems to have not met the legislative demand or the consultation process has not produced the expected dialog. In the meantime, academic and experts themselves are thin in quantity. 5. Conclusion The above analysis has revealed the practice of Vietnamese court in assuming international jurisdiction based on the principles enshrined in the CPC. Notably, Vietnamese judges tend to omit international bases and resort directly to domestic jurisdictional grounds when the defendants are Vietnamese. Where the defendants are foreign, the courts have shown flexibility in interpreting the notion of the place of performance of a contract and extending their jurisdiction to cases that affect the interests of Vietnamese individuals and companies. The court’s discretion can also be seen in cases where it interprets exclusive jurisdiction over disputes involving immovable property in Vietnam to include contractual disputes, such as those arising from capital transfer contracts. Despite such developments, challenges remain. To enhance transparency in adjudication, the intentions behind legislation should be more clearly expressed, and rules should be consistently applied and explained by the courts. At the very least, the Draft Resolution should be passed as soon as possible.

298