You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

June 20, 2023

Aircraft Deregistration in Thailand

Subscribe to Updates
The Legal Industry Reviews

Thailand is not a signatory to the Cape Town Convention. This means that upon an airline-lessee’s default, a lessor cannot present an Irrevocable Deregistration and Export Authorization (IDERA) document to easily repossess an aircraft. However, Thai law does allow for lessors to obtain aircraft deregisteration without the need to go to court.

Pursuant to Clause 12 of the Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand (CAAT) Regulation No. 23 (Reg. 23), the Director General of CAAT has the authority to deregister an aircraft when the possessory right to the aircraft under a lease agreement has expired for any of the following reasons:

  • The lease agreement has expired due to the lease term;
  • The lease agreement has been terminated by either the lessor or the lessee in accordance with its termination clause;
  • The lessor and lessee agree to terminate the lease agreement;
  • The lessor notifies the termination of the lease agreement and submits an irrevocable deregistration power of attorney together with an application requesting the exportation of the aircraft, and the lessor or its agent submits an application for deregistration of the aircraft to the Director General.

Under Reg. 23, a lessor can submit a deregistration application to CAAT asking CAAT to deregister. The deregistration application consists of evidence of the lease termination, a deregistration power of attorney (DPOA), the applicant’s certificate of incorporation, and the aircraft’s certificate of airworthiness and Certificate of Registration. CAAT will review the application and ask the lessee if it consents to the deregistration. If the lessee does not consent, CAAT may invite the lessor and lessee to one or more administrative hearings to give evidence on the dispute. If CAAT concludes that the lease has been validly terminated and the lessee no longer has possessory rights, CAAT will deregister the aircraft.

Under Thai law, a lessor can terminate its aircraft lease agreement in accordance with its termination clause. The aircraft does not need to be physically located in Thailand at the time of termination. The notice period specified in the lease agreement must be complied with by the lessor. With that in mind, if the rent is due monthly and the notice period specified is less than 15 days, the lessor should provide 15 days’ notice before termination, which is the notice period specified under Thai law.

A DPOA is recognized and can be a form of security, but is effective only when it is irrevocable and submitted under Reg. 23. Thai law does not require any specific form of DPOA. The law also does not require the DPOA to be certified, notarized, legalized and translated. From experience, the deregistration applicant should submit an original DPOA to CAAT. As such, the lessor should obtain and keep original versions of the executed DPOA.

Once CAAT issues a deregistration order, the lessor can show the order to the relevant airport authority (i.e. Airports of Thailand PCL) and take physical control of the aircraft. If the lessee owes debts to any government agency or its employees, CAAT will not allow the lessor to export the aircraft until the debts are paid. The lessor should expect to pay these debts in order to export the aircraft.

 

This article was first published in the inaugural Thailand edition of The Legal Industry Reviews, an international platform that publishes news and applied law updates from industry-leading law firms in 30 jurisdictions worldwide. The full aviation contribution to the applied law section of the June 2023 Thailand issue can be downloaded through the button below, or  browse the complete issue on The Legal Industry Reviews website.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Industries

Aviation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 19, 2021
Thailand has made significant changes to its statutory interest rate framework for the first time in almost a century. Since 1925, the statutory interest rate codified in Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code (the CCC) has remained at 7.5% per year. But with Covid-19 having an unprecedented impact on the Thai economy, the Thai Government, via emergency decree, has reduced the statutory rate. While the decree is largely aimed at providing relief to hard-hit SMEs and individual debtors, the amendments have broader implications for doing business in Thailand. Main Changes The new interest rate revisions are contained within the Emergency Decree Amending the Civil and Commercial Code B.E. 2564 (2021) (the Emergency Decree), which was published in the Government Gazette on April 10, 2021 and came into effect on April 11, 2021. The Emergency Decree amends Sections 7 and 224 of the CCC, which stated the previous statutory interest rate of 7.5% per year. The Emergency Decree makes three major changes. The first involves a reduction of the statutory interest rate from 7.5% per year to 3% per year in Section 7. The new 3% annual rate is subject to review every three years by the Ministry of Finance. The interest rate is subject to further change later by a royal decree. The second change concerns money debts under Section 224 of the CCC. The previous version of Section 224 stated, among other things, that a money debt based on a default bears interest of 7.5% per year. Under the Emergency Decree, the new actual statutory default interest rate is the statutory interest rate stated in Section 7 with an additional rate of 2% per year. The result is a 5% annual statutory default interest rate. Since the statutory default interest rate is based in part on the Section 7
Read More
February 23, 2021
As many are already aware, following the change of government in Myanmar on February 1, 2021, a draft Cyber Security Law was proposed which attracted widespread criticism. However, less attention has been paid to significant amendments to two existing laws, some of which have a similar effect to parts of the draft Cyber Security Law. In other words, while the draft Cyber Security Law has not progressed further and is under public scrutiny, significant elements of it have found their way into law in Myanmar by other routes. Because these amendments are already law, it is very important that individuals and businesses in Myanmar understand their implications. Amendments to the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens The Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens (2017), or the “Privacy Law,” was amended on February 13, 2021, less than two weeks after the military government came into power. These amendments chiefly address the power of the government to conduct searches, seizures, and arrests; to extend detention without judicial oversight; and to carry out broad surveillance and investigation activities that could intrude on individual privacy. The amendments accomplish this by suspending various sections of the Privacy Law for as long as the State Administration Council (the military body now governing Myanmar) is in power. The suspended sections include the following: Section 5: Search, seizure, and arrest without civilian observation The relevant part of Section 5 of the Privacy Law states, “The responsible authorities shall … when acting in accordance with existing law, not enter into a person’s residence or a room used as a residence, or a building, compound or building in a compound, for the purpose of search, seizure, or arrest, unless accompanied by minimum of two witnesses who should comprise Ward or Village Tract Administrators…”. The suspension
Read More
February 22, 2021
Following the recent imposition of sanctions on Myanmar individuals and companies by the US, the UK and Canada have now imposed new sanctions. As with the US sanctions, these new measures impact UK and Canadian citizens and companies, and non-UK and non-Canadian companies and citizens with interests in those jurisdictions. The EU has indicated that it is planning to issue similar sanctions in the near future. New UK Sanctions In addition to the 16 individuals already sanctioned by the UK government, on February 18, 2021, the UK government announced that three individuals have been sanctioned for serious human rights violations and are now subject to asset freezes and travel bans. The full list of Myanmar individuals and companies sanctioned by the UK is available on the website of the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. Breaches of UK financial sanctions are criminal offences punishable in the UK by up to 7 years imprisonment and heavy fines. New Canadian Sanctions Also on February 18, timed to coincide with the UK sanctions, new Canadian sanctions were imposed on nine individuals. As with the UK, Canada already had a number of individuals in the Myanmar military on its sanctions list, and the new additions bring the total number of individuals sanctioned by Canada to 54. All assets of these individuals in Canada are now frozen, and they are banned from travelling to Canada. Canadian businesses or entities may not do business with any of the 54 individuals. Full details of the impact of the sanctions are available on the Government of Canada’s website, as is a database of the Myanmar individuals and companies subject to them. Breach of Canadian sanctions carries with it up to 5 years’ imprisonment in Canada and/or a large fine. Other Countries The EU is reportedly drawing up sanctions
Read More
February 18, 2021
As you will no doubt know, on February 1, 2021, the Myanmar military declared a state of emergency in Myanmar for a period of one year. State Counsellor Daw Aung Sang Su Kyi was detained, as were the president and various significant political and civil leaders. Min Aung Hlaing, commander-in-chief of the Tatmadaw (Myanmar armed forces) has installed himself as chairman of the State Administration Council, the current administration. New sanctions The reaction of the Biden administration has been swift. On February 10, 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14014, which provides bases to impose sanctions on individuals and companies deemed by the US to, among other things: operate in the defense sector of Myanmar; be responsible for policies that undermine democratic processes in Myanmar; have taken actions to undermine democratic processes or institutions, or prohibit, limit, or penalize the exercise of free speech, in Myanmar; or be a spouse or child of the foregoing. On the next day, February 11, the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), imposed sanctions under the new executive order on ten individuals—including General Min Aung Hlaing—and three companies, including Cancri Gems & Jewelry Co, Myanmar Imperial Jade Co, and Myanmar Ruby Enterprise.  All such individuals and companies have now been designated on the US list of specially designated nationals (SDNs). Effect of sanctions As a result of such sanctions, the property of these individuals or companies that is located in the US or is under the possession or control of US companies and citizens is frozen, and US companies and citizens are generally prohibited from dealing deal with any such property.  Reportedly, roughly USD 1 billion of funds belonging to the individuals and companies blocked on February 11 are located in the US and thus now frozen. The SDN list As many
Read More