At the seminar "Customs and Enterprises Accompanying to Promote the Flow of Import and Export Goods through the Cai Mep - Thi Vai Port Cluster" on July 31, experts identified four bottlenecks hindering the movement of goods at the Cai Mep - Thi Vai port cluster. These include infrastructure connectivity, policy mechanisms, human resources, and administrative procedures. This port cluster accounts for 90% of the import and export goods through the seaport system of Ba Ria-Vung Tau province and plays an important role not only for Vietnam but also for Southeast Asia.
The Cai Mep - Thi Vai port cluster has received significant attention from the central government and various ministries in efforts to enhance management, exploitation, and development efficiency. However, the port still faces many obstacles such as transportation infrastructure connectivity, administrative procedure reform, customs procedures, specialized inspections, and the logistics service ecosystem.
Many businesses propose reducing transportation costs, upgrading the logistics service system, and support services. Solutions such as dredging the port entry channel, clearing the waterway from the Mekong Delta to the port, and developing the transportation system connecting the port to Cambodia are also emphasized. Mr. Do Thien Anh Tuan from the Fulbright School of Public Policy and Management believes that the development of this port cluster should be considered a national benefit and proposed 12 unprecedented breakthrough mechanisms to promote the development of the national maritime economic center.
The Cai Mep - Thi Vai port cluster needs central support to implement these breakthrough policy mechanisms, allowing Ba Ria - Vung Tau to pioneer pilot programs and resolve current bottlenecks to promote the flow of import and export goods.
Outside the United States, global demand for Chinese products is hitting new highs. Despite being a major target of U.S. tariffs, China has strengthened its trade relationships across Africa, Southeast Asia, and Europe in 2025. While China cements its role as a global export leader, the U.S. is increasingly shifting its focus toward self-reliance.
The “China +1” strategy, once seen as a temporary plan to diversify production outside of China, has now evolved into a long-term restructuring of global supply chains. Increasingly
Vietnamese food and spice producers are making steady progress in international markets by focusing on “real quality.” By combining authentic local flavors with strict international certifications, they are strengthening their competitiveness and building trust among global buyers.
Recently, Glotrans Vietnam once again affirmed its capability in the field of Project Cargo transportation by successfully completing a special shipment from Shanghai, China to Cat Lai Port, Ho Chi Minh City.
In the joyful spirit of celebrating Vietnamese Women’s Day on October 20th, Glotrans Vietnam organized a warm and intimate ceremony to express appreciation to all female staff across the system. The event was a heartfelt thank-you to the wonderful women – the “flowers” who contribute to the success and unity of the Glotrans family.
Recently, Glotrans Vietnam organized a warm and joyful birthday celebration for employees born in October across all branches and offices nationwide.
Company T (Plaintiff – the Insured) entered into an insurance contract with Company B (Defendant – the Insurer). After the insured event occurred, the Insurer alleged that the Insured had violated its obligation to prevent and mitigate losses. The Arbitral Tribunal acknowledged that such an obligation exists but concluded that the Insured did not breach it.
Under the insurance contract, the premium was to be paid in three installments, and in all three, the insured party was late in payment. When a dispute arose, the insurer (Defendant) argued that the insurance contract had terminated before the insured event occurred due to the late premium payment and therefore refused to make an insurance payout. However, the Arbitral Tribunal held a contrary view.
Company Q (Plaintiff – the Insured) and Company B (Defendant – the Insurer) entered into an insurance contract. After an insured event occurred, the parties could not agree on the value of the loss and therefore conducted an assessment. The unilateral assessment conducted by the Insurer was not accepted, while the independent assessment was only partially recognized.
