- EPLegal’s achievement in the ranking of LEGAL500.
- EPLegal’s founding partner, Mr. Tony Nguyen being named an A-list lawyer in 2020 and his participation at the 73rd Session of the UNCITRAL Working Group II.
- Legal updates on Decree No. 01/2021/ND-CP on enterprise registration, Decree 152/2020/ND-CP on foreign workers and employers, Decree 145/2020/ND-CP on working conditions and labor relations.
- New Wind power projects are not added to the Power Planning VII.
- Our analysis on Assignment and Authorization in corporate administration.
Category: News
Decentralization and Authorization in Corporate Administration
Thao Ta
The models of decentralization and authorization are widely applied in corporate administration activities. These models not only help enterprises to promptly respond to market fluctuations but also affects the internal administration of the enterprise in the fields of HR management, strategic management, etc.
Decentralization and its trends
Unlike the act of authorization which has been legalized in the Civil Code 2015 and the Law on Enterprise 2020 (Enterprise Law), the decentralized activity is not currently defined in specific legal transactions.
Decentralization is understood as the delegation of power to subordinates, which means the distribution of responsibilities based on their functions and is an important decision of management activities.
The decentralization is established through legal documents as well as internal documents of the enterprise, most basically the provisions of the Enterprise Law; Company Charter and Corporate Governance Code. These documents play a decisive role in completing the decentralized model to define the functions, duties and authority of agencies, organizations and individuals participating in the enterprise administration, management activities.
Decentralization can be classified based on several principles: Decentralization according to desired results; determined by function; The ladder principle; Principle of powers based on positions; Principle of authority and responsibility, etc. Based on these principles, there are two major trends in decentralization:
First, the trend to focus the decision-making powers on a single manager. Accordingly, only the Owner is entitled to make decisions, while other managers or even the Board of Directors are just mere formality and without any real authority. This means that the Owner has to conclude a contract in a hurry without having time to consider such a contract in detail. Otherwise, the transaction would be delayed.
Second, decentralization for delegates. Many businesses carry out the decentralization process to lighten their workload and to maximize the autonomy of each department. The model of decentralization is shown through company structure with separated departments and their particular rights and duties. It is very common that the Branch of an enterprise may conclude transactions on its own. However, only when a dispute arises shall the branch’s authority to sign a contract be examined. Pursuant to Article 84 of the Civil Code 2015 and Article 44 of the Enterprise Law, a Branch is an affiliate other than a juridical person. The branch shall on behalf of the company perform all or part of the functions of the juridical person (including the representative function). Thus, the head of the Branch can sign the contract on behalf of the Company only when being authorized by the legal representative of the Company. To conclude, the broad decentralization for subordinates must be associated with a detailed and strict process that is in accordance with the applicable law and regulations to avoid any legal risks for the Company.
It is often wondered that whether the decentralization upon by a written assignment constitutes a legal power of attorney or not? Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the concept of authorization under Vietnamese law.
Authorization
Authorization is one of the two representation forms stipulated in Article 135 of the Civil Code 2015.1 Authorization is known as an individual/legal entity that allows another to represent him to perform a civil transaction and the authorizer is still responsible for any acts performed by the authorized person within the authorized scope and duration.2 The Civil Code 2015 stipulates the rights and obligations of the authorizing and the authorized party from Article 565 to Article 568. According to Article 567.2 of the Civil Code 2015, the authorizing party is responsible for the performance of the authorized ones within the scope of authorization. On the other hand, if the performance of the authorized person is beyond the scope of authorization, or breaches other obligations in the authorization agreement, the authorizer can claim for damage resulted from such breaches.
There is a problem that if the commitment created by the authorized person acts beyond their authority to create a commitment, such commitment has legal validity or not? According to Article 567.2 of the Civil Code 2015, the authorizer shall not be responsible for any commitment beyond the authorized authority. However, it is unfair for third parties as they do not have enough time and resources to do investigate the scopes of authorization. Especially, in some cases, there is an assignment showing that the person performing the transaction has appropriate authorization, for example, the director of a representative office signs labor agreements, the director of the administrative department signs an agreement on the sales and purchase of office supplies, the sales manager makes a warranty commitment to the customer, etc. In such cases, the third-party implies that the person concluding the transaction with him has the appropriate authority. In the laws of other countries (e.g. UK and US law), there is an extension of the company’s liability in making a commitment to a third party in the event that a bona fide third party does not know the scopes of authorization. Thus, to avoid any risk related to the beyond of authorization’s scopes in the context of Vietnamese law, the best way to protect the interests of a third party is to ask the company to provide a written authorization that clearly shows scopes of authorization including the transaction execution on behalf of the company.
In terms of authorized authority in corporate administration. According to the provisions of Enterprise Law, only the legal representative of a company can establish the relationship of authorization related to the company administration matters. At the same time, the authorized person can sub-authorize a third person when (i) there is a consent of the authorizer; or (ii) in case of Force Majeure, if the sub-authorization does not apply, the purposes of a civil transaction for the interests of the principal is unachievable.3
In terms of authorization form. The authorized representation is very common, the parties can agree to conduct transactions in many forms, including verbally. However, the authorization of the company’s legal representative in respect of administrative activities shall be made in writing to be valid.
In practice, the internal authorization of a company can be made through (i) temporary authorization; and (ii) regular authorization. For the first form, the authorization for individuals, legal entities to perform the work on behalf of the company shall be conducted through a written authorization for each specific case. This is considered as the most common authorization method, among different entities of a company. The second method is regular authorization through internal governance decisions or the company’s operating regulations, for example, a Deputy Director performs his duties in a specific field within a specified period of time based on the authorization of the Director according to the regulations of the Board of Directors.
In summary, decentralization and authorization are completely different because authorization is a written agreement between the authorizing and authorized parties to perform acts on behalf of the authorizing person for a certain period of time. While decentralization means that people with higher positions divide power for their subordinates. Formally, the decentralization that is conducted through a document signed by the legal representative of the company and including the content of authorization can be deemed to be satisfied with the conditions of a power of attorney. However, based on the different nature of decentralization and authorization, those actions should be conducted through separate documents. The act of authorization in corporate administration shall be established in a written form which can be a power of attorney or an authorization contract signed by the legal representative of the company (or the authorized person who is allowed to sub-authorize). Meanwhile, decentralization is established through laws and regulations and internal documents of the company (e.g. the Company Charter, Assignment Decisions).
Please click the link below to read our legal analysis: English version | Vietnamese version
EPLEGAL’S NEWSLETTER – DECEMBER 2020
In this edition of our Newsletter, we report on:
- EPLegal attended the Seminar in Legal Framework and M&A market in VN;
- EPLegal donated money to the families struggling during the COVID-19 crisis;
- The newsly 2021 Arbitration Rules, Resolution No. 02/2020/NQ-HDTP, 2019 Labor Law, Decree 145/2020/NĐ-CP, Law on Securities; and
- Our analysis on Investor-State Dispute Settlement under 2019 Law on PPP and investment treaties impact to Vietnam party.
Please click the link below to read our Newsletter: Vietnamese version | English version
EPLEGAL’S NEWSLETTER – SEPTEMBER 2020
EPLegal’s Newsletter – September 2020
In this edition of our Newsletter, we report on:
- EPLegal’s achievement in the ranking of IFLR 1000 and Asialaw;
- Announcement of EPLegal’s new Da Nang branch;
- The newly revised 2020 Law on Enterprises, Law on Investment, Law on PPP and Law on Construction;
- Our analysis on the Singapore Convention on Mediation and its potential impact to Vietnam; and
- Our comments on the Drafted Provisions on Expedited Arbitration of the 72nd UNCITRAL Working Group II.
Please click the link below to read our Newsletter: Vietnamese version | English version
THE EXPEDITED ARBITRATION UNDER 72ND SESSION OF THE WORKING GROUP II – THE SOLUTION TO THE EFFICIENCY OF ARBITRATION
The solution to the efficiency of arbitration
From 21 September 2020 until 25 September 2020, the 72nd Session of the Working Group II (“WG II”) is taking place to discuss a Revised Draft of the expedited arbitration provisions (“Revised Draft”).
The UNCITRAL at its 51st Session gave the WG II the mandate to develop proposals that can enhance the efficiency of arbitration and ensure the quality of the proceedings. This mandate reflects the reality that arbitration is increasingly criticised for, among other things, being too lengthy and time-consuming. Moreover, the legitimacy of arbitration is more frequently questioned. Therefore, the UNCITRAL directed the WG II to take up issues relating to expedited arbitration to respond to this criticism.
In general, expedited arbitration is considered to be particularly appropriate for small disputes. It is a simplified form of proceedings and already introduced by a number of arbitral institutions. There is a variety of features permitting to expedite the arbitral proceedings – for example, providing for sole arbitrator instead of a panel of three, reducing the time limits for the various actions related to the proceedings, reducing the number of submissions, etc.
According to the Revised Draft, the express consent of the parties is the only triggering factor for the expedited arbitration to be applied (draft provision 1), however, the WG II is discussing if and where guidance could be offered to parties on when to refer a dispute to expedited arbitration. At the same time, The WG II is currently taking into account the following issues: (i) the complexity of the transactions and the number of parties involved; (ii) the need to hold hearings; (iii) the possibility of joinder or consolidation; and (iv) the likelihood of an award being rendered with the provided time frames.
Individuals who are interested in the expedited arbitration could refer to the Revised Draft of the WG II and Comments on the Revised Draft of expedited arbitration made by Mr. Tony Nguyen – Founding Partner of EPLegal.
Further information can be found here:
EPLEGAL PARTNERS ATTENDED VIETNAM ADR WEEK 2020 FROM 15 TO 19 JUNE
EPlegal partners attend Vietnam ADR week 2020
During June 15 – 19, 2020, the Vietnam International Arbitration Center (VIAC) has coordinated with more than 20 national and international partners to organize Vietnam ADR Week 2020 (VAW 2020) in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City. This event took place to mark a milestone for 10 years of Law on Commercial Arbitration (June 17, 2010) with over 1,000 offline and 20,000 online participants.
Mr. Tony Nguyen and Ms. Annie Ngo, Partners of EPLegal, have attended seminars of VAW 2020 in Hanoi and webinars held in Ho Chi Minh City. Tony also played the role of speaker and moderator of many seminars of VAW 2020.
VAW 2020, with 11 events lasting from June 15-19, was not only on arbitration and mediation matters but also provided many practical contents related to businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as in the context of Vietnam preparing to join EVFTA. Furthermore, VAW 2020 was a great opportunity for participants to interact with 50 leading national and international experts in economics and law fields, as well as an exchange forum between lawyers, legal experts, arbitrators, mediators, representatives from many enterprises.
For detail information about this event, please visit: http://www.viac.vn/
THE OPENING CEREMONY OF EPLEGAL’S NEW BRANCH IN DA NANG CITY
The opening EPLegal’s branch in Da Nang city
After a busy period of preparation, today, on June 03, 2020, EPLegal officially opened its new branch in Da Nang City. The opening ceremony took place in a cosy atmosphere with the attendance of EPLegal’s traditional clients and fellow lawyers.
Mr. Tony Nguyen – Founding Partner of EPLegal – has joined the Brussels Bar of Belgium
EPLegal is pleased to announce that our Founding Partner – Mr. Tony Nguyen – has officially become a member of the Brussels Bar (B-List) of Belgium since 18 May 2020.

In the last ten years since the establishment of EPLegal, Tony has utilised his profound knowledge and experience to drive the firm from a specialized practice in oil & gas industry to become a top tier law firm that provides comprehensive legal services. As a member of the Brussels Bar, Tony could now provide legal advice and represent clients in Belgium (except before courts). This is a great opportunity for EPLegal to expand its practice to the Belgian market in particular and to European Market in general.
For more info about Mr. Tony Nguyen, please visit here.
VIAC’s webinar on Arbitration and Mediation of Vietnam in the context of Covid-19
On 26 May 2020, Mr. Tony Nguyen – Founding Partner of EPLegal – will speak at a VIAC’s webinar on topic of “Arbitration and Mediation of Vietnam in the context of COVID-19: Practical guidelines to minimize damage arising from the COVID-19 pandemic to business activities”.

The webinar is the second event (after the first one on 13 May 2020) of a series of activities towards Vietnam Arbitration Week and Vietnam Trade Mediation 2020 held by Vietnam International Arbitration Center (VIAC) and Vietnam Mediation Center (VMC).
This webinar will take place from 2.30 pm on 26 May 2020, using the Zoom platform. To register your participation, please learn more here.