Contract disputes over promises of rewards and related judgments in Vietnam

Thank you for your question. LAWNET would like to answer as follows:

Provisions on promises of rewards specified in Article 570 of the Civil Code 2015 are as follows:

"Promises of rewards

1. A person having made a public promise of a reward must pay that reward to a person having performed the act requested by the promissor.

2. An act for which a reward is promised must be specific and capable of being performed and must not be prohibited by law nor contravene social morals."

Thus, the promise of reward is also considered a civil transaction, in which the person who promised the reward is responsible for paying the reward after the other person has performed the work requested by the promiser.

Article 572 of the Civil Code stipulates payment of rewards as follows:

- Where a person performs an act for which a reward is promised, that person shall be given the reward upon completion of the act.

- Where several persons perform an act for which a reward is promised, concurrently but independently, the person having first completed the act shall be given the reward.

- Where more than one person complete, at the same time, an act for which a reward is promised, the reward shall be distributed in equal shares amongst such persons.

- Where more than one person co-operate with each other to perform, at the request of the promissor, an act for which a reward is promised, each person shall receive a share of the reward in proportion to its contribution.

A promissor may withdraw its promise of a reward at any time prior to the commencement of the performance of the act. A withdrawal of a promise of reward must be made in the same manner and by the same media in which the promise of reward was announced.

Thus, receiving money after completing the brokerage work to sell the land is in his right according to the agreement of the two parties, and the other party is obliged to pay the bonus to you. In this case, you can sue to ask the Court to settle and force the other party to pay you land brokerage commissions.

Please refer to the below judgments on contract disputes that have been tried in practice for more information.

1. Judgment No. 147/2021/DS-PT on contract dispute

Mrs. Le Thi D and Mr. Nguyen Van T1 signed a contract to deduct 2,500m2 of land for Ms. L and NLQ1 on the condition that Ms. L help Ms. D's family win the dispute between Mrs. D and Ms. with Mr. Phan M.V. The contract is fully signed by both parties and Ms. D's child is Mr. Nguyen Quoc T2. However, after Ms. L helped Ms. D win the case for land use rights, Mrs. D did not perform the contract of deducting and awarding land to Ms. L. Ms. L repeatedly asked Ms. D to perform the contract, but Ms. D deliberately did not perform. Because during the implementation of the contract, NLQ1 gave up, Mrs. L only asked Mrs. D and her children D and Mr. T1 to give me 1,250m2 of land in accordance with the signed award contract. Ms. L's land parking is completely grounded and was recorded in the reconciliation minutes dated September 1, 2018 of the People's Committee of Hamlet B, Commune H. As a result, Ms. L filed a lawsuit, requesting that the court consider forcing Ms. Le Thi D to deduct for her 1,250 m2.

The defendant has a counterclaim requesting the Court to reject Ms. L's request and cancel the award contract between Mrs. D and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Thanh L and NLQ1.
 because the signature "T1" in the award contract dated October 19, 2015, provided by Ms. L to the Court is not Mr. T1's and Ms. L is not involved at all, it does not help in Ms. Mr. T1's winning the case at the appellate level.

The People's Court of Kien Giang province decided:

- Do not accept the petition of Ms. Nguyen Thi Thanh L against Ms. Le Thi D and Mr. Nguyen Van T1 about forcing Ms. Le Thi D and Mr. Nguyen Van T1 to reward Ms. Nguyen Thi Thanh L with an area of 1,250 m2.

- Accepting the counterclaim of Ms. Le Thi D against Ms. Nguyen Thi Thanh L.

2. Judgment No. 75/2020/DS-PT dated May 27, 2020 on a contract dispute

In 1990, Mr. T made a complaint to claim the two houses mentioned above, but due to his old age and poor health, Mr. T authorized Mr. BH to travel and take care of the procedures and papers. According to the commitment dated January 15, 1991, Mr. T promised to reward him with 30% of the total value of the property if he claimed 02 streets. He put in an effort to claim the house for Mr. T. While the state was handling the complaint, Mr. T recovered the commitment form made on January 15, 1991. Then Mr. T and Mr. Lam So P. , Do Van T, and Huynh Tha D, who co-founded the bank with Mr. T, jointly made a pledge to reward him with 40% of the total value of the property claimed. The Vinh Long Provincial People's Committee considered and resolved his complaint until 2012, then issued a decision to accept payment of the value of construction work in the amount of 430,398,740 VND. After receiving the money, Mr. T kept deliberately avoiding and failing to fulfill his promise to Mr. BH. Therefore, he started a lawsuit asking Mr. T to pay him a promised bonus equal to 40% of the total amount paid by the state.

The People's Court of Vinh Long province decided to force Mr. HT to pay Mr. Dinh Van BH the bonus amount of 12,060,000 VND.

Please Login to be able to download