On August 5, 2026, the Consumer Case Division of Thailand’s Civil Court rendered a judgment in a case involving a beauty clinic that advertised acne scar treatments using claims that the clinic was operated by a specialist physician and that the treatment, allegedly involving stem cell technology, could permanently remove acne scars.

The plaintiff brought a claim against both the physician-owner and the clinic company, alleging that the advertisements were false and induced her to purchase the treatment. The court found that the clinic was liable for the false representations and that the physician-owner, as both the authorized director of the company and the medical practitioner who provided treatment, was jointly responsible.

Although the plaintiff could not fully prove all damages claimed, the court awarded compensation of THB 20,000, together with interest.

While the judgment arose from a consumer protection dispute, it serves as a valuable reminder that medical facility advertisements in Thailand are regulated and may expose clinics and healthcare providers not only to regulatory enforcement but also to civil liability from patients who rely on misleading promotional claims.

Regulatory Framework Governing Medical Facility Advertisements

Medical facility advertising in Thailand is governed by the Medical Facility Act B.E. 2541 (1998), as amended by the Medical Facility Act (No. 4) B.E. 2559 (2016).

The principal secondary legislation is the Department of Health Service Support (DoHSS) Notification Re: Rules, Procedures, Conditions, and Fees for an Advertisement or Publication Concerning a Medical Facility, which came into force on November 25, 2019. Under this notification, “advertising” includes any act, by any means, that causes members of the public to see, hear, or otherwise become aware of a message, sound, or image for the commercial benefit of a medical facility. This broad definition covers not only traditional media but also clinic websites, social media, and other digital marketing channels.

Prior Approval Requirement

Section 38 of the Medical Facility Act requires medical facilities to obtain approval from the DoHSS before publishing any advertisement relating to the facility.

The only statutory exception is where the communication contains solely the medical facility’s name and location exactly as stated in its license.

Section 38 also expressly prohibits advertisements containing false, exaggerated, deceptive, or misleading statements—regarding the medical facility’s name or location, the medical services offered, the qualifications of healthcare professionals, or the competence or capabilities of healthcare personnel—that are intended to induce individuals to use the facility’s services.

The recent acne scar treatment case demonstrates the risk associated with claims that promise specific results, represent a doctor as possessing special expertise without adequate substantiation, or suggest that a treatment can permanently cure a condition.

Advertisements Exempt from Prior Approval

The 2019 notification permits certain information to be displayed within the medical facility premises without obtaining prior approval, including:

• Abbreviations, trade names, logos, and symbols
• Qualifications of healthcare professionals
• Service fees and pricing information
• Patient rights information
• Lists of medical services and operating hours
• Medical and public health knowledge, research findings, and educational content (subject to prescribed warning statements)
• Announcements concerning facility activities, relocation, destruction of records, or commemorative events

Advertisements That May Be Approved

Advertisements outside the exemption categories require approval before publication. The DoHSS may approve advertisements that contain the following promotional elements, provided specific conditions are met:

• Free medical services. Advertisements promoting free services must clearly state the date and time, the location, and the scope of the services offered.
• Gifts, exchanges, benefits, prizes, or lucky draws. These may be offered only if the service recipient is the direct beneficiary and the medical service provided is not below the general standard.
• Discounts on non-medical services. These may be offered only if the service recipient is the direct beneficiary.
• Discounts on medical services. These may be offered for a period of up to one year.

Application Procedures

The approval process depends on the location of the medical facility.

• For facilities located in Bangkok, applications must be submitted to the Center of Healthcare Advertising Approval (CHAA) within the DoHSS. Applications may be filed in person or by post. According to the CHAA website, straightforward applications involving text or still images may be approved within approximately five to seven working days after complete documentation is submitted.
• For facilities located outside Bangkok, applications must be submitted to the relevant Provincial Public Health Office.

Penalties for Noncompliance

Failure to obtain prior approval may result in a fine of up to THB 20,000 and an additional daily fine of up to THB 10,000 for failure to comply with an order requiring the advertisement to be removed.

Advertisements that are false, exaggerated, deceptive, or misleading carry more severe penalties: imprisonment of up to one year, a fine of up to THB 20,000, or both. Additional daily fines of up to THB 10,000 may also be imposed until the offending advertisement is withdrawn.

Increased Enforcement Against Repeat Offenders

According to recent statements from the DoHSS, enforcement against repeat offenders is becoming increasingly stringent. The department reportedly applies an escalating penalty approach:

• First violation: approximately 25 percent of the maximum fine
• Second violation: approximately 50 percent
• Third violation: approximately 75 percent
• Fourth violation: referral for criminal prosecution

Importantly, the authority currently considers each advertising platform separately. In other words, violations are generally assessed by channel rather than by the number of individual posts. However, authorities have indicated that future enforcement may consider each prohibited claim separately, potentially increasing exposure significantly, including the risk that serious or repeated violations may give rise not only to civil claims but also to criminal complaints or prosecution.

The DoHSS is also reportedly considering introducing informer reward mechanisms for advertising violations, although the proposal remains under review. If adopted, such mechanisms could further increase the likelihood of complaints being filed, including potential criminal complaints in cases involving false, exaggerated, deceptive, or misleading advertising.

As enforcement activity continues to increase, the distinction between aggressive marketing and unlawful advertising is becoming increasingly important. A misleading claim may not only result in regulatory penalties but may also expose the clinic, its directors, and treating healthcare professionals to civil claims from dissatisfied patients and, where the facts support it, to criminal complaints or prosecution under the applicable statutory framework.