Nguyen Danh Cong – Partner
Nguyen Quang Thai – Junior Associate
1. Introduction
An apartment building is a real estate type with a unique legal structure, as the buyer’s rights are not limited to the individual apartment but are also tied to the common areas of the building and land rights associated with the project. Therefore, when discussing the “duration of use” or “ownership term” of an apartment, approaching the issue solely from the perspective of the building’s structural lifespan can lead to an incomplete understanding of the nature of property rights.
This issue becomes particularly noteworthy in light of Resolution No. 21-NQ/TW dated 28 July 2026, of the 14th Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam (“Resolution 21”), which guidelines for newly constructed apartment buildings, establishing that the duration of apartment use shall be determined according to the building’s design lifespan, coupled with requirements to ensure the apartment owners’ property rights.
This orientation poses a critical legal question: if the duration of apartment use is tied to the design lifespan of the building, how will the property rights of apartment owners be handled and guaranteed when the building reaches the end of its useful life or no longer guarantees safety?
To answer this question, it is necessary to distinguish between three closely intertwined layers of rights: (i) ownership rights over the private property, which is the individual apartment; (ii) ownership rights over the common property of the apartment building; and (iii) land rights associated with the apartment project. Determining the structural lifespan of a building cannot be separated from defining the legal status of these three groups of rights.
2. Building Lifespan Is Not Identical to Ownership Duration
Under Clause 1, Article 58 of Law on Housing 2023, the duration of use of an apartment building is determined based on the design documentation and the actual period of use as concluded in an inspection report by a competent authority. The duration of use according to design records must be clearly stated in the appraisal document issued by the competent authority in accordance with construction law.
In essence, this regulation governs the life cycle of a physical building; it does not directly regulate the duration of the existence of property ownership rights.
This distinction holds significant meaning. A building may reach its design threshold or be assessed as no longer safe, but this does not automatically trigger a simple legal consequence where residents’ apartment ownership rights naturally terminate.
When an apartment building reaches the end of its design lifespan or shows signs of deterioration, the law establishes a mechanism for quality inspection, assessment, and safety level classification. Only based on these inspection results and relevant statutory conditions can it be determined whether the building can continue to be used or must undergo renovation, repair, demolition, or reconstruction.
Therefore, legally speaking, the concepts of “end of building lifespan”, “end of apartment usage duration”, and “termination of apartment ownership” must not be treated as synonymous.
Without this distinction, determining a building’s lifespan can easily be misinterpreted as a direct legal mechanism restricting citizens’ property ownership rights, whereas the core objective of lifespan regulations is safety management and building life-cycle control.
3. Apartment Ownership as a Complex Legal Structure
A key feature of apartment ownership is that an owner’s rights do not reside solely within the boundaries of the designated private ownership unit.
Under the legal framework governing apartment buildings, an apartment owner simultaneously holds rights over the common property of the building as prescribed by law. Common property includes structural parts used jointly or serving all owners, such as load-bearing structures, shared spaces, technical systems, and other components designated by law.
This carries a vital implication: the legal value of an individual apartment cannot be fully severed from the value and existence of the common property.
Physically, an apartment exists as an independent space, but legally and economically, it operates as an integral part of the building’s shared structure and infrastructure. When a building deteriorates or faces demolition, addressing the owner’s rights cannot focus solely on the private floor area; it must concurrently resolve the owner’s rights and interests in the shared common property.
This is precisely why mechanisms for renovating and rebuilding apartment complexes are critical to protecting property rights. If the law merely defines when a building must cease operation without establishing a clear transitional mechanism for the underlying property rights, a legal vacuum may emerge between the moment the physical structure ceases to exist and the establishment of rights over replacement property.
4. Land-use Rights as an Inseparable Element
In addition to the individual unit and common property, an owner’s rights must also be considered in relation to the project’s land-use rights.
For apartment buildings, land and structures share a unique legal relationship. While a building may have a finite technical lifespan, the land-use regime is defined under land laws and relevant land assignment, lease, or recognition decisions. Consequently, the demolition or reconstruction of a building does not naturally mean the underlying land value disappears along with the physical structure.
This is a crucial consideration when examining Resolution 21’s policy direction regarding commercial residential land for sale and the ties between an apartment’s useful life and a building’s design lifespan.
From a policy standpoint, a clear distinction must be made between a structure’s lifecycle and the legal regime governing the land. A building may need replacement due to safety hazards, but an owner’s rights and interests regarding the land, common areas, and replacement assets require a robust legal mechanism for continued protection.
Without incorporating land rights and common property into the “apartment usage duration” framework, the legal status of an apartment risks becoming ambiguous when reconstruction or renovation becomes necessary.
5. Expiration of Building Lifespan: How Are Property Rights Transitioned?
This represents the central legal challenge when institutionalizing the guidelines of Resolution 21.
Assuming an apartment building is deemed unsafe and marked for demolition, the legal process can be divided into three distinct phases:
First, assessing the building’s condition
Competent authorities must determine through technical inspections whether the building remains habitable or must be demolished. This determination requires clear technical criteria and transparent, verifiable procedures that protect owners’ access to information.
Second, handling owners’ rights over the old building
When demolition is required, the specific rights and obligations of each owner, including individual unit ownership, common area ownership, and land-related rights, must be explicitly defined. Concurrently, owners’ financial obligations, developers’ responsibilities, and resource mobilization mechanisms for renovation must be clearly outlined.
Third, establishing rights over the new building
If the complex is rebuilt on the original site, defining the relationship between old property rights and new replacement units is critical.
A comprehensive legal framework must address key operational details: allocation principles for new units, calculations for floor area variations, cost distribution among stakeholders, and the sharing of commercial value or value added generated by the new development.
These are not merely technical construction matters; they are fundamental to safeguarding property rights.
6. Property Rights During Reconstruction: Shifting From a “Demolition” Mindset to “Value Preservation”
A vital requirement for reforming apartment law is moving away from treating building demolition as the end of an owner’s rights.
Economically, an apartment’s value extends beyond its immediate physical structure to encompass its location, land-related interests, common property rights, and future revenue-generating potential.
Therefore, when an aging structure is demolished for reconstruction, the legal framework should aim to preserve and transition property values rather than simply register structural termination. This approach aligns with the mandate to secure property rights under Resolution 21. If owners must fulfill financial obligations to rebuild, the law must explicitly clarify their corresponding rights and interests in the newly created asset. Clear legal rules during this transitional phase are essential to prevent major disputes among owners, developers, and state authorities.
7. Key Legal Aspects Requiring Further Refinement
From a legislative perspective, institutionalizing the orientation of Resolution 21 requires simultaneously resolving several core issues:
First, unifying fundamental legal concepts
The law must clearly distinguish between “building design lifespan”, “apartment usage duration”, and “ownership duration”. Unclear use of these terms creates significant risks of conflicting interpretations during transactions and dispute resolutions.
Second, clarifying the legal status of land rights
Given that physical structures have finite lifespans while rights and interests regarding the underlying land continue, statutory provisions must clearly define how apartment owners’ rights are safeguarded during building replacement.
Third, improving mechanisms for reconstruction decisions
Clear regulations are needed regarding criteria for demolition decisions, owner participation rights, voting thresholds, state authority responsibilities, and dispute resolution mechanisms when owners disagree.
Fourth, enhancing financial mechanism transparency
Rebuilding apartment complexes demands substantial capital. Therefore, regulations must explicitly assign cost burdens, contribution methods, maintenance fund responsibilities, developer financing terms, and profit-sharing principles for added commercial floor area or value gains.
Fifth, securing interests during transitional periods
Citizens’ rights during relocation and construction must be protected through clear rules on temporary housing, moving expenses, project execution timelines, developer accountabilities, and remedy plans for project delays or failures.
Sixth, establishing effective dispute resolution mechanisms
Because multiple entities hold overlapping rights in a complex asset, reconstruction disputes often involve simultaneous claims over private property, land rights, financial obligations, contracts, and administrative decisions. Clear jurisdictional rules and procedures for each category of dispute are essential.
8. Conclusion
In essence, an apartment building’s design lifespan primarily addresses structural lifecycles and safety imperatives; it should not automatically be equated with the duration of property ownership rights.
An apartment unit represents a complex legal asset, wherein private ownership is intrinsically bound to common property rights and land-related interests. Consequently, when a structure reaches the end of its physical life, safeguarding property rights cannot be reduced to a binary question of whether an apartment’s usage duration has “validly remained” or “expired”.
The core policy challenge lies not in selecting a specific timeframe for structural lifespan, but in crafting a robust legal framework to preserve and transition owners’ property rights during renovation, demolition, or reconstruction.
If the law establishes comprehensive mechanisms governing technical inspections, demolition, reconstruction, land rights, common property, financial obligations, compensation, resettlement, and title establishment for replacement assets, lifespan determinations can serve as effective tools for lifecycle management and public safety. Conversely, introducing an “apartment usage duration” without clarifying post-expiration property protections risks creating substantial uncertainty for homebuyers and the real estate market.
Therefore, when examining the policy directions of Resolution 21, the critical legal question is not merely “how long can an apartment be used?” but rather: “when the physical structure no longer exists, how will the owners’ property rights be safeguarded, transitioned, and realized?”. The answer to this fundamental question will be the true measure of the completeness, feasibility, and fairness of the legal framework governing apartment building lifespans.
