# Codebook

Applies to `coding_table_224_judgments.csv` and `study_sample_175.csv`, which share an
identical column structure. Encoding is UTF-8. Binary variables take the value `1` or `0`;
no cell is left empty.

---

## Identification and case attributes

### `case_number`
The official case number as printed on the judgment, in the form used by Vietnamese courts:
sequence number / year / case type – instance. For example, `17/2019/KDTM-PT` is the 17th
commercial case decided in 2019 at appellate instance. One judgment in the coding table
carries the placeholder `KHONGSOHIEU-2022-A-M` because the published copy did not show a
case number.

### `year`
Year in which the judgment was issued, from the case number. Range 2016–2026.

### `instance`
| Value | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `ST` | First instance (sơ thẩm) |
| `PT` | Appellate (phúc thẩm) |
| `GDT` | Cassation (giám đốc thẩm). Excluded from the sample by scope criteria; one such record appears in the coding table as an excluded row. |

### `category`
The case category assigned by the court, which determines the procedural track.
| Value | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `KDTM` | Commercial (kinh doanh thương mại) — both parties acting in business |
| `DS` | Civil (dân sự) |

The same construction contract dispute may be filed under either track depending on the
parties' status, so this variable records the court's classification, not a property of
the contract.

### `sample_status`
| Value | Count in coding table | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| `included` | 167 | In the final sample; ground for withholding payment identifiable |
| `included_ground_not_identifiable` | 8 | In the final sample; the judgment does not permit the ground to be determined. Excluded from ground frequencies. |
| `excluded_on_reading` | 45 | Read in full, then found not to meet the scope criteria. Reason recorded in `evidentiary_note_vi` with the prefix `LOAI:` |
| `duplicate_dispute` | 4 | A separate judgment in the same dispute as another judgment already in the sample, typically the first-instance judgment where the appellate judgment is already included. Reason recorded with the prefix `TRUNG_LAP:` |

`study_sample_175.csv` contains only the first two values.

---

## Grounds for withholding payment

**Multi-label.** A judgment carries `1` on every ground the court records and `0` on the
rest. The eleven ground columns do not sum to the number of judgments. A judgment may
carry no ground at all, in which case `C0_no_ground_stated = 1`.

The coded ground is the ground on which the **paying party** withheld or refused payment,
as it appears in the court's account of the dispute — not the plaintiff's framing of the
claim and not the court's ultimate finding on the merits.

| Column | Ground |
|---|---|
| `C1_quantity_acceptance_documentation` | The completed work quantity, the acceptance record, or the payment documentation is disputed or said to be incomplete. Covers refusal on the basis that the acceptance minutes are unsigned, that the as-built or settlement file is not complete, or that the parties disagree on the quantity actually executed. |
| `C2_quality_defects` | Defective work, failure to remedy defects, or a dispute over the warranty obligation. |
| `C3_delay` | Late completion by the contractor, or a claim of liquidated damages or set-off for delay. |
| `C4_site_handover` | Failure or delay by the employer in handing over the site or securing site access. |
| `C5_price_adjustment` | Dispute over price adjustment, escalation, or the adjustment formula. |
| `C6_variations` | Dispute over varied or additional work: whether it was ordered, whether it was agreed, how it is valued. |
| `C7_site_conditions_force_majeure` | Unforeseen site conditions or force majeure. |
| `C8_termination` | Termination or unilateral suspension of the contract, and the consequences claimed to follow from it. |
| `C9_advances_bonds` | Advance payment, retention, or a bond or guarantee: recovery, set-off, or release. |
| `C10a_validity_authority` | Validity of the contract, or authority of the person who signed it or signed a key record. |
| `C10b_public_investment_procedure` | Public investment procedure or funding source: absence of approval, absence of allocated capital, or non-compliance with the public investment regime. |

### `C0_no_ground_stated`
`1` where the judgment records that the paying party advanced no substantive ground for
withholding payment — typically an acknowledged debt, an admitted quantity, or a defendant
who did not appear and filed no defence. `0` otherwise.

Within the 175-judgment sample, `C0_no_ground_stated = 1` for 68 judgments, all of which
carry `sample_status = included` and zero ground flags. The relationship is exact: within
`sample_status = included`, a judgment carries `C0_no_ground_stated = 1` if and only if it
carries no ground flag. The 8 judgments with
`sample_status = included_ground_not_identifiable` carry `C0_no_ground_stated = 0` and no
ground flags; absence of information is not the same as absence of a ground, and these are
excluded from ground frequencies rather than counted as having none.

### Frequencies in the final sample (167 judgments with identifiable ground)

| Ground | Count |
|---|---|
| C1 quantity / acceptance / documentation | 58 |
| C2 quality and defects | 22 |
| C10a validity and authority | 22 |
| C3 delay | 18 |
| C8 termination | 16 |
| C9 advances and bonds | 13 |
| C6 variations | 8 |
| C5 price adjustment | 7 |
| C10b public investment procedure | 7 |
| C4 site handover | 2 |
| C7 site conditions and force majeure | 1 |
| **Total ground flags** | **174** |

---

## Party and outcome variables

### `form_money_claim`
Binary. **[TO BE COMPLETED — define this variable before publishing.]**

### `defendant_absent`
`1` where the judgment records that the defendant did not appear and the case was heard in
their absence, `0` otherwise. In the final sample, 40 of 175.

### `plaintiff`
The party bringing the claim.
| Value | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `main_contractor` | Contractor claiming against the employer |
| `subcontractor` | Subcontractor claiming against the main contractor |
| `employer` | Employer claiming against the contractor |
| `both` | Claim and counterclaim, both substantively pursued |
| `main_contractor_v_subcontractor` | Main contractor claiming against its subcontractor |
| `not_determined` | Roles not determinable from the published text |

### `outcome`
The disposition recorded in the judgment, from the perspective of the plaintiff's claim.
| Value | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `allowed_in_full` | Claim allowed in full |
| `allowed_in_part` | Claim allowed in part |
| `dismissed` | Claim dismissed |
| `annulled` | Judgment below annulled and the case remitted, or proceedings annulled on procedural grounds |
| `settlement` | The parties reached agreement and the court recorded it |
| `discontinued` | Proceedings discontinued |

---

## `evidentiary_note_vi`

Free text, unaccented Vietnamese, recorded during coding. Present for every row. Records
what the judgment showed on the point that governed the coding decision — which document
was missing, what the paying party said, what the court held on the acceptance or payment
records.

Some notes open with an uppercase working tag. The vocabulary is:

| Tag | Count in final sample | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| `CHUDE_CHUNGTU` | 29 | The certification theme: the paying party refused on the basis that acceptance or payment documentation was incomplete or unsigned. |
| `CHUDE_CHUNGTU_NANG` | 7 | The same theme in its strong form: the incompleteness of the documentation itself blocked the claim, for example where the court discontinued proceedings for want of a condition precedent to suit. |
| `CHUOI_THANHTOAN` | 6 | Payment chain: the main contractor's obligation to the subcontractor was made conditional on receipt from the employer. |
| `DOI_CHUNG` | 6 | Counter-case: the contract fixed a specific calendar date for payment rather than conditioning it on certification. |
| `KHONGDU` | 8 | Insufficient information to determine the ground. Corresponds exactly to `sample_status = included_ground_not_identifiable`. |
| `LOAI` | — | Excluded on reading; the text after the colon states which scope criterion failed. Appears only in the coding table. |
| `TRUNG_LAP` | — | Duplicate proceedings; the text after the colon names the other judgment in the same dispute. Appears only in the coding table. |

---

## `candidates_237_random_order.csv`

A separate file with its own structure, recording the documents read in full.

| Column | Contents |
|---|---|
| `coding_order` | Position in the randomized reading order, 1–237. Randomizing the order was intended to prevent the coding scheme from being shaped by the sequence in which judgments happened to be retrieved. |
| `case_number`, `year`, `instance`, `category` | As above. Four rows have an empty case number because the retrieved copy did not show one. |
| `source_file` | The retrieval file the document came from, identifying which of three retrieval sessions produced it. |