Maritime Law · 15.09.2026

Vessel Detention in Vietnam: Arrest, Detention and Refused Clearance

Three separate mechanisms hold a ship in Vietnam: court arrest, administrative detention and refused departure clearance. Who decides each, the time limits, and the way out.

Lawyer UnilawReading time: 7 min

By Lawyer Nguyen Nhu Hai – UniLaw LLC

When a ship stops moving in a Vietnamese port, the first question is not how to get her out. It is which of three separate mechanisms is holding her, because each one has a different decision-maker, a different time limit and a different way out. Vessel detention in Vietnam gets confused with ship arrest constantly, and the confusion costs days. This page separates them.

Vessel detention in Vietnam: three ways a ship is held

Mechanism	Who decides	Why	How long
Arrest (bắt giữ tàu biển)	Regional people’s court	To secure a maritime claim, or as an interim measure	Up to 30 days, extendable through proceedings
Administrative detention (tạm giữ tàu biển)	Director of the Maritime Administration, or an administrative-penalty authority	Casualty investigation, unpaid fine, other violations	5 days, extendable by 5
Refused departure clearance	Director of the Maritime Administration	Safety, security, maritime labour, pollution, unpaid dues	Until the reason is cured

Only the first is a court matter. The other two sit with the port authority, so you fix them with the authority and not with a judge.

Port State control, VIMAWA and the Tokyo MOU

Most vessel detention in Vietnam starts with an inspection. Vietnam is a member Authority of the Tokyo MOU, the Asia-Pacific port State control regime, through the Viet Nam Maritime and Waterway Administration (VIMAWA). Its inspectors board foreign ships at Vietnamese ports and check them against the international instruments the MOU covers.

In practice that means the familiar list: SOLAS and the collision regulations (COLREG 1972), the Load Lines Convention, MARPOL, STCW 1978 as amended for crew certification and watchkeeping, and the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 for crew conditions.

The Maritime Code then converts a failed inspection into a domestic power. It does not list conventions. Instead it speaks of conditions for maritime safety, maritime security, maritime labour and pollution prevention, and it lets the port authority hold the ship until those conditions are met.

Refused departure clearance

Article 92(3) gives the Director of the Maritime Administration the power to license and supervise arrivals and departures, and to refuse them where the vessel does not meet the necessary conditions on maritime safety, maritime security, maritime labour and pollution prevention.

Article 98 then lists when a ship may not leave:

she lacks the required conditions on safety, security, maritime labour or pollution prevention;
maritime charges and fees remain unpaid within the prescribed time;
another risk to the ship, the people or cargo on board, or the marine environment is detected; or
a court or another competent authority has ordered arrest or detention.

For the first three, Article 98(3) obliges the Director to tell the master and the relevant agencies the reason, and to clear the ship as soon as that reason no longer exists. So the route out is documentary and practical: cure the defect, prove it, and ask for clearance.

Timing helps here. Article 96 requires the procedures to be started within two hours of berthing or of the intended departure, and obliges the port authority to decide within one hour of receiving complete documents.

Administrative vessel detention in Vietnam: the five-day rule

Foreign owners expect this one least. Article 114 allows tạm giữ — administrative detention — in three cases: during a maritime casualty investigation where detention is necessary, where an administrative fine has not been paid in full, and where another violation triggers vehicle detention under Vietnamese law.

Article 115 sets the clock, and it is short. For a casualty investigation, the Director of the Maritime Administration may detain for no more than five days. Where more time is needed to gather evidence for a casualty inside port waters, the specialised maritime authority may extend it by a further five days. For a casualty outside port waters, the Minister of Transport decides the extension. The article also says the investigation must proceed promptly and the detention must end as soon as enough evidence is collected.

For an unpaid fine, the detention ends immediately once the owner pays the fine or guarantees payment. That makes a guarantee the fastest exit in most cases.

Procedure, and vessel detention in Vietnam that goes wrong

Article 116 requires a written detention decision, served immediately on the master, on the specialised maritime authority and on the other State agencies at the port. When the reason ends, or the period expires without a valid extension, the deciding officer must issue a termination decision and serve it the same way.

Two provisions protect the owner. Article 115(4) makes the person who ordered a wrongful detention liable to compensate. Article 117 gives the master, the owner and the operator the right to complain against the decision.

Therefore keep the paperwork. A detention that runs past its period, or that continues after the investigators have what they need, is not merely inconvenient. It is a claim.

Temporary suspension of arrivals and departures

Article 80 covers the wider situation, where nothing is wrong with your ship at all. For reasons of maritime safety, maritime security, environmental protection, national defence and security, or natural disaster and epidemic, the Director may temporarily stop vessels entering or leaving a port, terminal, wharf, buoy berth or water area.

Article 80 also requires the Director to cancel that decision once the reason disappears, and to report immediately to the specialised maritime authority while notifying the owner or its agent and the other State agencies at the port.

This is the provision behind weather closures and security stand-downs. It does not target your vessel, and arguing about her condition will not shorten it.

Where court arrest fits

Of the three forms of vessel detention in Vietnam, arrest is the only one a claimant can trigger. Article 129 defines it as a court decision preventing or limiting a ship’s movement, and Article 130 places competence with the regional people’s court for the port where the vessel is operating, following the amendment made by Law No. 81/2025/QH15 with effect from 1 July 2025.

Judgment No. 09/2021/KDTM-PT of the Superior People’s Court in Ho Chi Minh City shows how it runs in practice. A vessel was arrested on 25 April 2019 after a collision, held for close to a month, and released only when the owner lodged a letter of undertaking from an insurer worth USD 5,781,888.39.

Note the division of labour in that case. The court ordered the arrest; the port authority carried it out. Article 92(5) is what obliges the Director to execute a court arrest decision.

What to do when your ship is held

Get the decision in writing and read which article it cites. That single line tells you which of the three mechanisms you are in.
Check the date and the stated period, because administrative detention expires on its own.
For a defect-based refusal, fix and evidence the defect rather than argue about it.
For an unpaid fine, offer a guarantee immediately.
For a court arrest, prepare security in parallel with the substantive answer.
Keep every notice and every delivery record, in case the hold outlasts its lawful basis.

Legal basis

Maritime Code 2015 (Law No. 95/2015/QH13), consolidated as Document No. 52/VBHN-VPQH of 18 March 2026 — Article 80 (temporary suspension of arrivals and departures); Article 91 (the Maritime Administration); Article 92 (powers of the Director, including refusal of clearance, execution of court arrest decisions and detention under Article 114); Article 96 (two-hour and one-hour time limits); Article 98 (grounds on which a vessel may not leave); Article 99 (Government detail on clearance); Article 114 (grounds for administrative detention); Article 115 (competence, five days, extensions, and compensation for wrongful detention); Article 116 (written decision, service and termination); Article 117 (right to complain); Articles 129–130 (court arrest and the competent court, as amended by Law No. 81/2025/QH15 from 1 July 2025).
Tokyo MOU — the Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control in the Asia-Pacific Region, to which Vietnam belongs through VIMAWA.
International instruments checked at inspection — SOLAS; COLREG 1972; the International Convention on Load Lines; MARPOL; STCW 1978 as amended; and the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 as amended.

How we handle vessel detention in Vietnam

Unilaw acts for owners, managers, charterers and P&I correspondents when a ship is held at a Vietnamese port. The work starts with identifying the legal basis on the face of the decision, then running the correct route: rectification and clearance with the port authority, a guarantee against a fine, or security and a court application where the hold is an arrest. We have offices in Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City and Nha Trang.

For the wider practice see our Vietnam maritime lawyer page. On court arrest specifically, see ship arrest in Vietnam. Where cargo was damaged while the ship was held, see cargo claim in Vietnam. On cover for delay and detention, see marine insurance in Vietnam. On crew wages and repatriation, see seafarer wages in Vietnam. For flagging, mortgages and priority, see ship registration in Vietnam. Further judgments sit in our maritime law library.