Suebsiri Taweepon, a partner in Tilleke & Gibbins’ intellectual property group in Bangkok, was elected president of the Intellectual Property Association of Thailand (IPAT) when the association’s board members convened an online voting session to select new leadership. Suebsiri was the unanimous choice of the 15 board members of IPAT. As president, Suebsiri will guide IPAT in setting its program of seminars and events related to current developments in intellectual property in the country. He will also represent the association and provide oversight in relation to IPAT’s participation in regional and international initiatives. Established in 1972, IPAT is a leading intellectual property association in Thailand, and Tilleke & Gibbins has played an active role in the ongoing development of the group for many years. Darani Vachanavuttivong, managing partner of Tilleke & Gibbins and managing director of the firm’s intellectual property practice, served on IPAT’s board from 2001 to 2019 and was president of the association from 2005 to 2009.

On November 17, Tilleke & Gibbins’ employment team in Bangkok continued its outreach to companies at Thai industrial estates by leading an employment law seminar at Hitech Ayutthaya industrial estate. Chusert Supasitthumrong, partner and director of Tilleke and Gibbins’ dispute resolution department in Bangkok commenced the first session by going over the basis of changing employment conditions and agreements according to the Labour Protection Act, conditions and requirements for strikes and lockouts, and illustrating the issues with case studies from his experience. The second presentation was delivered by Piyawat Vitooraporn, an associate from the same department. Piyawat covered termination of employment in Thailand, detailing potential legal consequences of terminating employees, statutory termination payments, and unfair termination. This session at Hitech Ayutthaya industrial estate is part of a series of trainings and seminars that Tilleke & Gibbins’ employment specialists are organizing at industrial estates in Thailand to increase companies’ understanding of Thailand’s employment laws and the benefits of complying with these regulations.

On October 19, Chusert Supasitthumrong, partner and director of the firm’s dispute resolution department, and Suruswadee Jaimsuwan, counsel from the same department, offered an in-person seminar on labor law to assist companies in coping with ongoing issues and consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and the current economic climate. After being welcomed by AMATA Corporation’s corporate communications senior section manager, Chusert began by giving attendees an overview of employment legal issues and concepts, such as employer-employee agreements, principles of labor demands, and strikes and lockouts. In the second part of the session, Suruswadee focused on termination of employment, highlighting notable consequences employers may face when terminating employees, rules for statutory termination payments, and unfair termination. This session at the AMATA City Chonburi Industrial Estate is part of a series of trainings and seminars that Tilleke & Gibbins’ employment specialists are organizing at industrial estates in Thailand to increase companies’ understanding of Thailand’s employment laws and the benefits of complying with these regulations.

On October 5, three attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution group in Bangkok—associate Anyamani Yimsaard, counsel Suruswadee Jaimsuwan, and partner Thawat Damsa-ard—met with Judge Paopun Chopnamtaan, the vice secretary of Thailand’s Courts of Justice, to offer their comments on a proposed new system of recording witness testimony in the criminal court in Thailand. The current practice for creating a record of witness testimony in Thai courts is for the judge to speak a summary of the witness’ courtroom statements into an audio recorder for a court clerk to transcribe. The transcription is then read for all parties and the witness to confirm the accuracy of the content. The courts are in the process of replacing this practice with a system of recording witnesses’ courtroom testimony on video. The dispute resolution lawyers’ feedback was sourced mostly from the department’s most recent internal training session. They commented on the pros and cons of the program and shared their experiences with similar systems elsewhere, such as Singapore and the UK. The judge welcomed the input, and looked forward to considering how to apply their suggestions so that the proposed procedural changes can answer various stakeholders’ needs.