One of the important advantages of commercial arbitration is the right of the parties to choose a dispute resolver. However, businesses should not equate an arbitrator with an outstanding reputation or professional profile with a suitable person for its case. The suitability depends on the nature of the dispute, legal issues or decisive evidence, the capacity to administer the proceedings, and the requirement for independence and objectivity. Therefore, the selection of arbitrators must be prepared as a strategic decision, which can significantly affect the time, cost, and efficiency of dispute resolution.
The enterprise must check the legal conditions of the candidate
Starting from the core issue of the dispute and limiting the right to choose
Before making a list of candidates, the business needs to identify the issue that is likely to determine the outcome of the dispute. For disputes primarily over contractual interpretation or applicable law, legal analysis competence should be prioritized; for disputes over quality, progress or technical causes, specialized experience and evaluation of evidence may be more important. In multi-party or jurisdictionally complex cases, the ability to manage proceedings becomes a key factor. Determining the right focus helps businesses avoid making choices based solely on reputation or seniority.
Next, the enterprise must check the legal conditions of the candidate. Article 20 of the Law on Commercial Arbitration 2010 (the Law on Commercial Arbitration) stipulates the standards of civil act capacity, qualifications and experience (with exceptions for experts with high professional qualifications and practical experience), and stipulates the cases in which arbitrators are not allowed to act as arbitrators. It is necessary to distinguish these mandatory conditions from the additional standards and limitations of selection according to the rules of the arbitration center. The examination must be based on the version of the rules that actually apply to the dispute and be carried out before the expiration of the time limit for selecting or appointing arbitrators.
In Vietnam, the Vietnam International Arbitration Center ("VIAC") can be considered as one of the notable centers in separately stipulating standards for arbitrators participating in dispute resolution at the Center. Specifically, Appendix I of the VIAC Arbitration Procedure Rules, effective from July 1, 2026, stipulates standards related to the language, expertise and experience of arbitrators. Notably, according to this regulation, the person selected or appointed as an arbitrator to resolve disputes at VIAC must be named in the List of arbitrators of VIAC at the time of notification of the selection or appointment. This is a new point compared to the VIAC Arbitration Rules in 2017, and at the same time creates a difference from the procedural rules of a number of other arbitration centers in Vietnam such as the Vietnam Trader Arbitration Center ("VTA"), the Southern Commercial Arbitration Center ("STAC"), and the Vietnam Economic Arbitration Center ("VEAC"),... which allows the parties to select arbitrators who are not named in the list of arbitrators of the center. [1]Therefore, before selecting arbitrators, enterprises need to carefully check and ensure compliance with the standards applied at the Arbitration Center where the dispute is resolved.
Check for independence, objectivity, impartiality and conflict of interest
One of the principles of dispute settlement by arbitration specified in Clause 2, Article 4 of the Law on Shopping Centers is that arbitrators must be independent, objective, impartial and comply with the provisions of law. Concretizing this principle, Article 42 of the Law on Shopping Centers stipulates cases in which the arbitrator must refuse to settle the dispute or the parties have the right to request the change of the arbitrator, including: (i) The arbitrator is a relative or representative of a party; (ii) The arbitrator has a related interest in the dispute; (iii) There are clear grounds to show that the arbitrator is not impartial and objective; (iv) He has been a mediator, representative or lawyer of any party before bringing the dispute to arbitration, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the parties.
A professional relationship or related interests does not automatically mean that the arbitrator must be changed; it is necessary to assess the nature of the relationship, the extent of its influence and the statutory basis. However, ignoring the verification may lead to a request for a change of arbitrator, interruption of proceedings and, if the conditions under Article 68 of the Law on Commercial Markets are met, affect the validity of the award. It should not be taken for granted that any conflict of interest on the basis of the award is contrary to the basic principles of Vietnamese law.
In addition to easily identifiable cases, enterprises can proactively review the candidate's relationships with the disputing parties, parent company, subsidiaries, lawyers and representatives of the parties; find out the cases in which the candidate has participated; as well as consider relevant professional relationships, consulting activities, representation or financial interests. This information can help businesses more fully assess the independence, objectivity and impartiality of the candidate and identify the risks of conflicts of interest that may arise. In fact, arbitration centers in Vietnam often require the selected or appointed arbitrators to publicly and promptly notify the circumstances that may affect their independence, impartiality and objectivity through reviewing and signing the Arbitrator Declaration according to the center's form. The information that is made public will then be notified to the parties by the arbitration center[2]. Therefore, businesses also need to carefully consider the content of this statement, instead of relying only on publicly available occupational information when evaluating candidates.
Expertise must be relevant to the problem to be solved
The right arbitrator does not necessarily have the highest academic rank, degree or reputation. Enterprises need to consider both legal knowledge, industry experience, evidence evaluation capacity and procedural management experience. More importantly, these criteria must be prioritized according to the characteristics of the case: the dispute may be named in a specialized field, but the outcome depends mainly on the interpretation of the contract, the statute of limitations, the authority or the burden of proof.
For example, in a construction contract dispute under FIDIC, the business may have to weigh between an expert who is very knowledgeable in construction techniques but has little procedural experience and an arbitrator who has experience in managing complex disputes but is not technically in-depth. If the focus is on the cause of the delay or the determination of the volume incurred, technical knowledge is of great value; if the dispute is primarily about interpretation of terms, evidence, and procedures, legal and procedural skills may be more important. This is a trade-off that needs to be assessed on a specific record, there is no right choice for every case.
Understanding the legal approach but not looking for a commitment to the outcome
In legal issues with different interpretations, enterprises can refer to the candidate's writings, research, public professional statements and professional experience to evaluate the method of interpreting the law, contracts and evidence. However, a view expressed in a different context cannot be considered a reliable prediction of the outcome of the current dispute.
For example, when a construction dispute raises questions about the relationship between specialized law, the Commercial Law, and the Civil Code, the determination of the applicable norm may affect the statute of limitations or sanctions. Instead of finding someone who has previously supported the argument in its favor, the business should assess the candidate's ability to analyze the normative conflict, interpret the contract, and fully consider the evidence of the parties.
The examination of candidates must comply with procedural rules and independent and impartial standards. Enterprises should not have private contact to discuss the content of the dispute, explore conclusions or seek assurance of the award. The arbitrator selected by a party is also not a representative or defender of that party's interests; the value of the choice lies in the capacity for independent and grounded arbitration.
Businesses also need to check the deadline for selecting arbitrators according to the applicable rules to avoid losing the opportunity to actively choose.
Selection of the Sole Arbitrator and the Three-member Arbitration Council
In case the dispute is resolved by the Arbitral Tribunal, usually consisting of three arbitrators if the parties do not agree otherwise, the enterprise should note that the arbitral award is adopted on the principle of majority. In case the majority is not reached, the award is made according to the decision of the Chairman of the Arbitral Tribunal[3]. Therefore, when selecting arbitrators, enterprises should not only evaluate each candidate individually, but also need to consider the structure and coordination among the members of the Arbitral Tribunal.
However, a disputing party usually does not have the right to design the entire composition of the Arbitral Tribunal on its own. The right to select and appoint arbitrators and the Chairman depends on the agreement of the parties, applicable procedural laws and rules. Therefore, enterprises need to evaluate candidates within the scope of their actual right of choice, and at the same time consider the possibility of professional coordination among members without identifying the arbitrator of their choice with their representative.
Evaluation of procedural efficiency, time and actual costs
In addition to expertise, businesses should learn about their ability to devote time to the case, their willingness to participate in sessions, their experience handling large cases, the use of online sessions, and their ability to manage schedules. A well-known but overly busy candidate can incur significant extensions, delays, and costs. Businesses also need to check the deadline for selecting arbitrators according to the applicable rules to avoid losing the opportunity to actively choose.
In the practice of arbitration proceedings, it is not uncommon for a party to select an arbitrator who is residing abroad or in a province or city other than the arbitration venue. However, if the selection of arbitrators does not necessarily meet any specific requirements for the place of residence, the enterprise may consider this factor to optimize costs, especially when the value of the dispute is not large enough to compensate for additional expenses. Because, the cost of travel, accommodation and other related expenses of the arbitrator may increase the total cost of dispute settlement because the advance and allocation of these costs will be carried out in accordance with the applicable arbitration procedure rules and the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal[4]. Therefore, for disputes that are not of great value and the legal issue is relatively simple, an arbitrator with the right expertise for a reasonable fee may be the more effective option.
Travel, lodging, and other expenses should be taken into account, but residence should not be used to evaluate candidates alone. The actual impact also depends on the format of the meeting, the rules for advance and allocation of costs, the value of the dispute, and the need for specific professional capacity. An effective option is one that has a reasonable total cost and time relative to the complexity, value and risk of the case.
In addition, for cross-border disputes, the validity and enforceability of the award must be taken into account. Because when the dispute has foreign elements, enterprises need to further evaluate their international arbitration experience, procedural language, applicable law, cross-border evidence handling skills and ability to administer procedures to ensure the right to be presented by the parties. It is also necessary to place the selection in the context of the legal location of the arbitration and the country in which the award is expected to be recognized and enforced. The international experience of the arbitrator does not in itself guarantee that the award will be enforced, but it can help limit procedural errors that affect the validity and enforceability of the award.
There is no suitable arbitrator for all disputes. Businesses need to start from identifying the right issue capable of deciding the case, then check the legal conditions, independence, professional capacity and ability to administer proceedings of the candidate. The goal is not to find a person who is able to make a favorable judgment for him, but to choose a person who has sufficient capacity and independence to resolve disputes fairly, effectively and in accordance with the law. That is the essence of the right to choose arbitrators in the process of resolving disputes by arbitration.
[1] Articles 12, 13 VTA Arbitration Procedure Rules; Article 11 STAC Arbitration Procedure Rules; Articles 12,13 VEAC Arbitration Procedure Rules.
[2] Article 12 of the 2026 Arbitration Procedure Rules of the VIAC; Article 16 of the VTA Arbitration Procedure Rules; Article 16 of the VEAC Arbitration Procedure Rules.
[3] Article 60 of the Law on Shopping Malls 2010.
[4] Refer to the provisions on advances and allocation of costs to arbitrators in Articles 40, 41 of the 2026 Arbitration Procedure Rules of VIAC; Articles 35, 36 of the VTA Arbitration Procedure Rules; Articles 34, 35 of the STAC Arbitration Procedure Rules,...
