Procedures for on-site appraisal of real estate during the preparation phase for the first instance trial of a civil case at the Court

Procedures for on-site appraisal of real estate in the preparation phase for the first instance trial of a civil case at the Court
October 29, 2025 10:00

In the preparation phase for the first instance trial, the Court collects evidence provided by the litigants and other entities, proactively collects evidence at the request of the litigants, including on-site appraisal of real estate. The practical implementation of regulations on procedures for on-site appraisal of real estate in the preparation phase for the first instance trial of a civil case at the Court has given rise to a number of inadequacies and problems that need to be assessed in order to amend and supplement the provisions of the law and unify their application.

1. Legal regulations on on-site appraisal procedures for real estate in the preparation phase for the first instance trial of a civil case
Collecting evidence in the preparation phase for the first instance trial is a civil procedural activity in which the Court verifies, collects, collects, evaluates, and examines evidence to clarify the nature of the case and concludes on the correctness or incorrectness of the parties' requests[1]. The Court's evidence collection activities are intended to support the parties in clarifying the details of the case at the request of the parties or when deemed necessary. On-site appraisal in general, on-site appraisal of real estate in the preparation phase for the first instance trial of a civil case is an important measure to collect evidence as a basis for resolving civil cases accurately and in accordance with the law, ensuring the rights and legitimate interests of the parties. According to Clause 2, Article 6 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code (CPC), amended and supplemented in 2025[2], the Court is responsible for assisting litigants in collecting evidence and only collects and verifies evidence in cases prescribed by this Code. According to Clause 7, Article 70 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, amended and supplemented in 2025[3], litigants have the right to request the Court to verify and collect documents and evidence of the case that they cannot do themselves; request the Court to request other litigants to present documents and evidence they are holding; request the Court to issue a decision requesting agencies, organizations and individuals that are keeping and managing documents and evidence to provide such documents and evidence; request the Court to summon witnesses, request appraisals and decide on asset valuation. According to Clause 2, Article 97 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, amended and supplemented in 2025[4], the Court may conduct on-site appraisal. According to Clause 1, Article 101 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, amended and supplemented in 2025[5], at the request of the litigant or when deemed necessary, the Judge shall conduct on-site appraisal. On-site appraisal of real estate in the stage of preparing for the first instance trial of a civil case is a measure to collect evidence in preparation for the first instance trial, arising from the request of the litigant or when deemed necessary by the Court.

With the above provisions, the measure of collecting evidence by on-site appraisal of real estate in the stage of preparing for the first instance trial of a civil case is to ensure the implementation of Article 91 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, amended and supplemented in 2025 on the burden of proof[6]. However, through the practical application of evidence collection and proof in civil proceedings, the author has found some shortcomings.

2. Practical implementation of on-site appraisal of real estate in the preparation phase of the first instance trial of civil cases
2.1. The content of on-site appraisal of real estate in the preparation phase of the first instance trial of civil cases is not fully implemented, leading to the trial not being comprehensive and thorough. To clarify this content, the author would like to give an illustrative example as follows:
In Judgment No. 18[7], the Trial Panel stated: During the process of resolving the case, the Court of First Instance has not collected sufficient evidence such as: Records of granting land use right certificates to the plaintiff, defendant, evidence to determine the origin of land use, land use process, land boundaries to serve as a basis to determine whether the People's Committee of District M granted land in accordance with the current status, boundaries and land use process or not? The court of first instance has not collected sufficient evidence: the decision to force Mr. Van The C and Ms. Phan Thi My H1 to pay Ms. Do Thi Dieu H the encroached land area of 470m2 is unfounded.

The Minutes of on-site appraisal dated March 7, 2023 do not show how much land plot 102 of the plaintiff and land plot number 37 of the defendant, map sheet number: 73, in village C, commune D, district M, province G, is in use, is it insufficient or sufficient compared to the issued certificate? Cannot determine the area, location, and proximity of the disputed land? Cannot determine whether there is property on the disputed land or not?

The first instance judgment stated: "Mr. Van The C and Ms. Phan Thi My H1 must pay Ms. Do Thi Dieu H the encroached land area in the West adjacent to the inter-commune road, 0.60m in size, in the East adjacent to Mr. P's land, 9.00m in size, 100m in length, total encroached land area of 470m2". T1, the defendant must pay for the encroached land area of 470m2" but did not specifically declare the boundaries (only declare the east, west, length) and did not specifically declare the plot number, map sheet number, land address, which will lead to the Judgment not being enforced. The Trial Panel decided: Annul the First Instance Civil Judgment No. 18/2024/DS-ST dated November 6, 2024 of the People's Court of M district. Transfer the case file to the People's Court of M district to re-examine the case according to the first instance procedure.
With this decision of the Trial Panel, when conducting the second first instance trial, the People's Court of M district must re-evaluate on-site the land area compared to the issued certificate, the area, location, boundaries of the disputed land and assets on the land. This means that the litigant must bear the costs of on-site examination and appraisal according to the provisions of Article 157 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code.
In some cases, the The Court's on-site appraisal of real estate in the preparation phase of the first instance trial of a civil case is difficult due to errors by the housing and land management agencies. This leads to fierce disputes and the Court's on-site appraisal of real estate must be carried out many times to determine the origin of the property and have a solution.
2.2. On-site appraisal and measurement of real estate in the preparation phase of the first instance trial of a civil case is hindered, opposed, and uncooperative from the litigants, the people who are managing and using the real estate. Currently, the measurement to determine the current status to resolve land use rights disputes is mostly carried out by the Land Registration Office under the Department of Natural Resources and Environment.
Practice shows that in the past, the Court could not measure and determine the current status of the disputed land because the litigants, mainly the defendants or people with related rights and obligations, opposed and obstructed such as: not allowing the plaintiff to instruct on prohibiting boundary markers, fencing off real estate, not opening doors (in case of construction on disputed land); threats to use force, threats to destroy machinery and equipment used for measuring by surveyors, etc. Along with the above situation, the work of archiving and managing land plot records by the competent State management agency on land through each stage and period is not complete, and changes in land plots are not updated; information in the land plot records is not accurate, so there are no documents to determine the location of the disputed land plot. When conducting measurements on disputed land without land use right certificates, the specialized agency requires land users adjacent to the disputed land use right to be present and sign to confirm the land boundary, but they refuse and do not cooperate in signing to confirm the boundaries. On-site appraisal of real estate in the stage of preparing for the first instance trial of a civil case conducted by the Court in conjunction with the Branch of the Land Use Right Registration Office, the Urban Management Department, the Finance and Planning Department, and the Natural Resources Department environment, representative of the People's Committee of the commune or ward where the disputed property is located. A common manifestation of obstruction is that the person managing and using the disputed property that the Court is appraising does not allow the Court to access the disputed property by locking the door, or shouting and cursing at the litigants. As a result, the Court has to postpone the on-site appraisal many times, asking the Commune Police and judicial support forces to protect it during the working process.

Regarding the handling of acts of obstructing the verification and collection of evidence by litigants, Clause 6, Article 489 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code[8] stipulates: Anyone who commits one of the following acts, depending on the nature and severity of the violation, may be subject to disciplinary action, administrative sanctions or criminal prosecution in accordance with the provisions of law when obstructing the litigants from conducting on-site appraisal, valuation, appraisal or verification and collection of other evidence as prescribed by this Code. Clause 4, Article 101 The 2015 Civil Procedure Code[9] stipulates: Judges have the right to request the People's Committee of the commune, the police of the commune, ward or town where the subject is being examined and appraised on-site to support in cases where there is an act of obstructing the examination and appraisal on-site. However, in practice, this act has so far been rarely handled. According to Point b, Clause 3, Article 18 of Ordinance No. 02/2022/UBTVQH15 dated August 18, 2022 on administrative sanctions for acts of obstructing litigation activities[10], a fine of VND 7,000,000 to VND 15,000,000 shall be imposed for acts of threatening, using force, causing disorder or other acts of obstructing competent persons from conducting on-site examination and appraisal, deciding on valuation, deciding on requesting appraisal or implementing other measures to verify and collect evidence as prescribed by law.
There is a view that if the Court conducts an on-site appraisal and a party opposes or obstructs it, it will apply temporary emergency measures prohibiting the party from obstructing or opposing the measurement as prescribed in Article 127 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code (prohibiting or forcing the performance of certain acts) [11]. In principle, this measure will be enforced by the civil enforcement agency and the Court will receive judicial support for on-site appraisal of real estate during the preparation stage for the first instance trial of a civil case. However, according to Point a, Clause 1, Article 130 of the 2008 Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement, amended and supplemented in 2014, 2020, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement), within 24 hours from the receipt of the decision on judgment enforcement, the Enforcement Officer must immediately apply the security measures and enforcement measures prescribed in Articles 118, 119, 120 and 121 of this Law to ensure the enforcement of the decision on prohibiting or forcing the litigant to perform certain acts; handing over minors to individuals or organizations for care, nurturing, education; and temporarily suspending the decision to dismiss employees. Article 118 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement stipulates the enforcement of the obligation to perform certain work. Accordingly, in the case of the obligation to perform certain work according to the judgment or decision but the person subject to the judgment fails to perform, the Enforcement Officer shall decide to impose a fine and set a time limit of 05 working days from the date of the decision to impose a fine for that person to perform the judgment enforcement obligation. After the set time limit, if the person subject to the judgment fails to perform the judgment enforcement obligation, the Enforcement Officer shall handle as follows: a) In case the work can be assigned to another person to perform on his/her behalf, the Enforcement Officer shall assign it to a person with the conditions to perform; the cost of performance shall be borne by the person subject to the judgment enforcement; b) In case the work must be performed by the person subject to the judgment enforcement himself/herself, the Enforcement Officer shall request the competent authority to prosecute criminal liability for the crime of failure to perform the judgment. According to the above provisions, there are no specific provisions on the enforcement of the decision to apply temporary emergency measures prohibiting the party from performing the act of obstructing the measurement of real estate. Meanwhile, Article 93 of the Law on Enforcement of Civil Judgments stipulates the attachment of locked or packaged objects. That is, Article 93 of the Law on Enforcement of Civil Judgments stipulates that when attaching locked or packaged objects, the Enforcement Officer shall request the person who is obliged to execute the judgment, the person who is using or managing the object to unlock or unpack it; if they do not open it or are intentionally absent, the Enforcement Officer may himself or herself or hire another individual or organization to unlock, break the lock or unpack it, in which case there must be a witness. The person who is obliged to execute the judgment shall bear the damage caused by the unlocking, breaking the lock or unpacking. If necessary, after unlocking, breaking the lock or unpacking, the Enforcement Officer shall seal the object and hand it over for safekeeping in accordance with the provisions of Article 58 of this Law[12]. Article 93 of the Law on Enforcement of Civil Judgments only stipulates the attachment of locked or packaged objects, but does not stipulate the act of obstructing the measurement of real estate and forcing the unlocking or breaking the lock for measurement. The enforcement agency cannot apply the temporary emergency measure of prohibiting the parties from obstructing the measurement or opening the house door for the competent authority to conduct the measurement of the house and land because there is no basis. Therefore, the Court cannot apply Article 127 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code. In this case, the parties and property users have acts of resistance and obstruction of the on-site appraisal, the Judge shall request the People's Committee of the commune, the Police of the commune, ward or town where the subject of on-site appraisal is located to support in case of acts of obstruction of the on-site appraisal. The Judge shall make a record of the parties and property users who have acts of resistance and obstruction of the on-site appraisal and shall issue a decision to handle the administrative violation[1]

2.3. Regarding the level and cost of on-site appraisal.
Current law does not stipulate whether the Court can issue a notice to pay additional litigation costs or not, and if the notified person does not pay additional costs, the Court has the right to suspend the settlement of the case according to the provisions of Point d, Clause 1, Article 217 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code[14].
When conducting on-site appraisal, the costs that often arise include: costs of renting means of transport, costs for representatives of the People's Committee, the police of the ward, commune, representatives of the neighborhood, village, hamlet to participate in supporting on-site appraisal, costs of compensation for coordination with relevant agencies, costs for court staff, costs of renting means of transport, related techniques, costs of measuring, drawing maps, extracting houses, land, integrating maps to determine land boundaries, locations of disputes. For costs of renting equipment, techniques, and costs of measuring and drawing houses and land, the expenses are based on invoices and documents; for the remaining expenses, there is no document stipulating the expenses that are allowed and not allowed, and there is no specific expense level. In many cases, the parties sign a surveying contract with a professional agency and make an advance payment for a part of the expenses; however, when the results are available, they do not pay additional surveying costs according to the signed contract. Therefore, the professional agency does not send the results of the surveying drawings to the Court, the case must be temporarily suspended pending the results of the surveying, leading to the case being prolonged and resolved for many years. The Civil Procedure Code does not stipulate the obligation to bear the costs of on-site review and appraisal in cases where the Court conducts on-site review and appraisal multiple times for a case. Many cases, especially land use rights disputes with large areas, unclear boundaries or the disputed land is urban land, the shape of the disputed land is complicated, on-site appraisal, actual measurement and determination of the disputed location are difficult, often the litigants complain about the results. In many cases, the Court has to re-conduct the on-site review and appraisal and the results are different from the previous on-site review and appraisal results. Regarding the level of advance payment for on-site review and appraisal, on-site review and appraisal costs, the obligation to pay advance payment for on-site review and appraisal costs is still inadequate and limited. According to Article 155, Article 156 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, the Court is the agency that estimates the level of advance payment for on-site review and appraisal costs. When collecting advance payment from the litigants, the Court issues a receipt or a receipt; When paying the parties, the Court lists the items spent, without invoices, documents or receipts. The use of revenue sources must be for the right purpose and the right subjects. Regarding the level of advance payment for on-site examination and appraisal costs, the Court bases its estimate on the disputed assets and the nature of the case. For example, costs for means of transport (distance and fare, time), expenses for surveying units; and compensation for those participating in on-site appraisal. The level of advance payment can range from VND 5,000,000 to VND 15,000,000, with a list of receipts and expenditures and the excess payment returned to the parties. Regarding the obligation to bear on-site examination and appraisal costs, it is stipulated in Article 157 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code. Accordingly, in cases where the parties do not have other agreements or the law does not have other provisions, the obligation to bear on-site appraisal costs is determined according to the provisions of this Article. However, the provisions of Article 157 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code are still limited, not covering all disputes and requirements that in practice must be carried out on-site appraisal in general, and on-site appraisal of real estate in the stage of preparing for the first instance trial of a civil case in particular.

3. Some solutions for improvement
From the provisions of the law, trial practice, application of the order and procedures for on-site appraisal of real estate in the stage of preparing for the first instance trial of a civil case, the author recommends improving the law as follows:
First, the Government should soon issue a decree guiding the implementation of Ordinance No. 05/2024/UBTVQH15 dated December 11, 2024 on litigation costs. This is the legal basis to ensure that the Court collects advance payments for on-site examination and appraisal costs, on-site examination and appraisal costs, and determines the obligation to pay advance payments for on-site examination and appraisal costs according to the provisions of Articles 155 and 156 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, amended and supplemented in 2025.
Second, add Clause 6, Article 157 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, amended and supplemented in 2025, as follows:
“Article 157. Obligation to bear on-site examination and appraisal costs
In cases where the parties do not have other agreements or the law does not provide otherwise, the obligation to bear on-site examination and appraisal costs is determined as follows:
…
6. In cases where the plaintiff’s request to initiate a lawsuit is partially accepted by the Court, the plaintiff must bear the appraisal and measurement costs for the part of the request that is not accepted by the Court. Defendant, person with rights The related parties with independent requests must bear the costs of appraisal and measurement for the counterclaim and independent requests that are not accepted by the Court.”.
Third, regarding the handling of those who obstruct, oppose, or do not cooperate in the Court's on-site review and assessment. The Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuracy, and the Ministry of Public Security should promptly issue a document (joint circular) regulating the handling of acts of obstructing the verification and collection of evidence by litigants as prescribed in Article 489 of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, Point b, Clause 3, Article 18 of Ordinance No. 02/2022/UBTVQH15 dated August 18, 2022 on administrative sanctions for acts of obstructing litigation activities.

According to the Court Magazine

Procedures for on-site appraisal of real estate during the preparation phase for the first instance trial of a civil case at the Court

Practices

Team of Lawyer

RIGHT TO INVITE LAWYERS AND RIGHT TO VISIT THE DEFENDANT DURING DETENTION: LEGAL BASIS, ...

NOTARIZATION OF CONTRACTS AND TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING FOREIGN ELEMENTS ACCORDING TO ...

RESOLVING LABOR DISPUTES INCLUDES FOREIGN ELEMENTS UNDER CURRENT LAW

REGULATIONS ON PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY RESIDENCE UNDER CURRENT RESIDENCE LAW

SCOPE OF LAWSUIT AND RIGHT TO CHANGE AND SUPPLEMENT REQUESTS OF THE LICENSEE UNDER THE ...

RELEASE IN CRIMINAL CASES UNDER CURRENT LAW

Procedures for on-site appraisal of real estate during the preparation phase for the first instance trial of a civil case at the Court

Practices

Team of Lawyer

RIGHT TO INVITE LAWYERS AND RIGHT TO VISIT THE DEFENDANT DURING DETENTION: LEGAL BASIS, ...

NOTARIZATION OF CONTRACTS AND TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING FOREIGN ELEMENTS ACCORDING TO ...

RESOLVING LABOR DISPUTES INCLUDES FOREIGN ELEMENTS UNDER CURRENT LAW

REGULATIONS ON PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY RESIDENCE UNDER CURRENT RESIDENCE LAW

SCOPE OF LAWSUIT AND RIGHT TO CHANGE AND SUPPLEMENT REQUESTS OF THE LICENSEE UNDER THE ...

RELEASE IN CRIMINAL CASES UNDER CURRENT LAW

Modal title