How Are Construction Incidents Handled? Classification, Cause Assessment and Compensation Liability under Decree 06/2021/ND-CP

When part of a floor slab suddenly collapses during construction, serious structural cracking appears, or scaffolding falls and injures workers, the first reaction of the developer and the contractor is often panic and confusion about what to do first. In fact, construction law has already laid down a fairly rigorous process for handling construction incidents, and complying with the correct sequence in the very first hours is decisive for human safety, for preserving the scene for cause assessment, and for each party’s subsequent legal liability.

This article clarifies how construction incidents are classified and handled under Decree 06/2021/ND-CP dated 26 January 2021 on quality management, construction and maintenance of construction works, from incident classification and the sequence of reporting and remediation, to the assessment of causes and the allocation of compensation liability.

Mục 01How many levels of construction incidents are there?

Under Decree 06/2021/ND-CP, construction incidents are divided into three levels based on the extent of damage to the works or harm to persons, namely level I, level II and level III incidents. Level I incidents are the most serious, involving the collapse of the works, the collapse of a part of the works, or damage posing a risk of total collapse of works of grade I or higher. Level II incidents correspond to works of grade II and grade III, while level III incidents comprise the remaining cases outside the two groups above.

This classification is not merely academic; it determines the competent authority for resolution and the degree of State involvement. The more serious the incident, the higher the level of the authority participating in organising the cause assessment, and the heavier the documentation and explanation requirements imposed on the parties involved. Therefore, as soon as an incident occurs, a preliminary evaluation of its severity to determine which level must be reported to is an indispensable first step.

Mục 02The sequence of actions immediately after an incident

The paramount priority in the first hours is ensuring human safety. The primary responsibility rests with the developer and the construction contractor: they must promptly suspend construction, organise the rescue of people and property, cordon off and protect the scene, and take the necessary measures to prevent the incident from spreading or giving rise to further danger. In parallel, the parties must report the incident to the competent State management authority as prescribed, rather than quietly dealing with it themselves to avoid publicity.

A common and legally very disadvantageous mistake is hastily clearing, dismantling or repairing the scene before the cause assessment. The principle is that the incident scene must be preserved to serve the assessment of causes, and may only be dismantled or cleared with the permission of the competent authority, except where emergency intervention is required to save people and avert danger. If the developer clears the scene on its own initiative, adverse inferences may be drawn against it when causes and liability are determined, because the most important objective evidence no longer exists.

Mục 03Cause assessment and allocation of liability

Once safety has been secured, the legally decisive stage is the assessment of the incident’s causes. The competent State authority organises the assessment to clarify the causes and the liability of the organisations and individuals involved. The assessment conclusion is the basis for determining whether the fault lies with the survey, design, construction or supervision stage, with the materials used, or with objective force majeure factors, and thereby who must bear compensation liability.

The legal consequences for the party causing the incident can arise at several levels. First, the organisations and individuals that caused the incident are liable to compensate for the damage and bear the costs of remediation. In addition, violations of quality management and safety regulations may be subject to administrative sanctions. In serious cases resulting in loss of life or injury, individuals at fault may also face criminal prosecution in accordance with law. Precisely because the consequences span civil, administrative and criminal liability, the assessment conclusion becomes a document that every party needs to monitor and has the right to comment on.

By way of illustration, imagine the partial collapse of a basement slab during construction. If the assessment concludes that the cause was an unsuitable shoring design, primary liability will lean towards the contractor that designed the construction method; if the cause was the construction contractor’s failure to follow the approved method, liability shifts to the construction contractor; and if substandard materials were the cause, liability may involve both the supplier and the party that accepted the incoming materials. A different conclusion as to cause will completely alter the balance of compensation among the parties.

Mục 04A lawyer’s advice on prevention and response

In our advisory experience, most legal damage after an incident stems not from the incident itself but from the parties’ missteps in the period immediately following it. Businesses should prepare an internal response procedure in advance, clearly designating who decides to suspend construction, who is responsible for reporting, and the absolute principle of not interfering with the scene beyond rescue purposes without permission. Keeping complete construction logs, stage-by-stage acceptance minutes and material records also serves as evidentiary insurance, helping the business prove it acted properly when a dispute erupts.

Moreover, as soon as an incident occurs, businesses should consult a lawyer early for guidance on reporting obligations, the right to participate in the cause assessment, and how to protect their interests during the determination of liability, instead of turning to a lawyer only after being sued or sanctioned. This proactive approach often makes a substantial difference to the outcome. You may refer to the construction lawyer in Vietnam services of HTIC Law Firm for comprehensive support.

Mục 05Frequently asked questions

If the incident was caused by natural disaster or force majeure, must the contractor still pay compensation? If the assessment determines that the cause was entirely a force majeure event and the parties duly implemented the required preventive measures, compensation liability may be excluded or mitigated under the general principles of civil law. However, if there is an element of subjective fault, such as careless workmanship or failure to install protective coverings, liability corresponding to that fault remains.

May the developer engage its own independent assessment organisation? The assessment of the causes of an incident is organised by the competent State authority. The parties have the right to provide documents and evidence and may engage technical consultants to defend their position, but the official conclusion used for determining liability is the assessment conclusion issued through the statutory process.

Is failing to report an incident punishable? Yes. Concealing, failing to report or dishonestly reporting a construction incident is a violation that may be sanctioned, and it aggravates liability when consequences materialise. Accurate and timely reporting is always the safer choice for businesses.

Mục 06Legal support from HTIC Law Firm

HTIC Law Firm accompanies developers and contractors in building incident response procedures, protecting their interests during the cause assessment process, and resolving disputes over compensation for damage arising from construction incidents. Fixed fee quotation for each matter/project — Hotline +84 379 044 299.