In Vietnam, current legislation mandates that contracts for the transfer of land use rights must be executed in writing and duly notarised or certified. This requirement is often perceived as conflicting with the freedom of contract. This article argues that the mandatory written form does not constrain, but rather reinforces, the freedom of contract. A written instrument furnishes essential legal attributes that shield the parties from risks arising from informational asymmetry and from instability in Vietnamese judicial practice. Empirical analysis of land-related disputes demonstrates that written, notarised, or certified contracts enjoy significantly more consistent enforceability than oral agreements or informal writings. On this basis, the article identifies deficiencies stemming from the lack of coherence between the Civil Code and the Law on Land while recommending legislative reform toward a model of corrective formality: one that affirms the necessity of the written form while expressly providing for narrowly defined exceptions to protect bona fide parties. Such reform would reduce legal uncertainty in land use rights transactions, strengthen the freedom of contract, and foster a transparent and equitable legal environment.
