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

July 15, 2011

The Importance of Drawing Up Your Will

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

When Khun Nong’s father passed away from a heart attack, it was a very emotional time. After several days of funeral rites, family members returned to their homes abroad, and Khun Nong was on her own and emotionally exhausted. Nevertheless, it was time to start settling the estate.

Khun Nong’s father had always promised her she would one day inherit his business and all that he owned. Unfortunately, she soon learned her father had not made a will. This resulted in an outcome she was not expecting—one far different from what her father wanted for her. Ultimately, a sizeable portion of the inheritance went to others.

Khun Nong’s story illustrates an issue we encounter frequently. We are often asked by clients—Thai and non-Thai alike—whether it is really necessary to make a will. While no one likes to think about death, most people do want a say in how their estate is managed after they pass away.

When a person dies, his or her estate is handed down to the heirs. They are either legatees (people to whom you make gifts in your will) or statutory heirs (people who receive your estate in accordance with the law if you die without a will).

For example, if you are survived by your descendants, spouse and parents, and you did not have a will, your estate will be divided equally among each of your descendants (per stirpes), your spouse and each of your parents. (The spouse’s interest in the community property is a separate issue.) If you are not survived by any of the above, the law provides a list of other heirs, in rank order, who will inherit proportionately. Statutory inheritance can be very complicated.

Rather than relying on statutory inheritance, we have found clients prefer to make a specific plan for their assets. They may be motivated by a desire to make certain gifts to certain people, or to disinherit others. Some may have children with special needs and want to ensure they will be provided. Others may want to leave everything to a charity. As such, we always recommend making a will.

To make a will, one must be at least 15 years old and of sound mind. Thai law stipulates wills may only be made in accordance with forms prescribed by statute. Anything that does not meet this requirement is not a will. Thai law authorises five specific forms of will—written, holographic, public, secret, and oral.

Most clients make written wills, as it is the most practical method. To be valid, a written will must be typed or handwritten, clearly state the date at the time of making, and be signed by the testator in the presence of two witnesses. The two witnesses must also sign to certify the signature of the testator.

Witnesses must be at least 20 years of age and not adjudged incompetent. Those with certain special needs such as the blind, deaf or mute may not witness wills.

It is important to remember legatees cannot be witnesses. For example, if you are leaving a gift to your spouse, your spouse cannot witness your will.

When planning an estate, a particularly important decision is to choose the executor(s). The executor will be responsible for settling the estate and carrying out the testator’s wishes. An executor must be at least 20 years old, of sound mind, and not adjudged bankrupt by the court. Importantly, an executor can be a legatee under a will, and this is often what people plan, particularly those who are married or in other committed relationships.

If you have children, it is very important to give some thought to their living arrangements in case both parents pass away. Many people are also concerned about children inheriting significant sums before they know how to properly manage money. You can designate a custodian of property to manage a child’s inheritance until a certain age.

When clients seek our help with estate planning, we normally start with many questions. It is important to compile a list of assets and each person who will be designated to receive gifts under the will. Some people want to leave certain items to certain people such as a treasured necklace for a daughter or an heirloom watch for a son.

Once we have gathered all the information, we begin preparing the will. After finalising it, we host the signing at our office and can even provide witnesses. Once the will is ready, it is important to store it in a safe place and let the executor(s) know how to access it.

When the end finally comes, a probate action is required to appoint an executor or administrator to settle the estate. Following appointment, the executor or administrator will be given a court order, which he or she can use to sell property, close bank accounts, and wind down business in the course of settling the decedent’s estate and distributing property to the decedent’s heirs.

It is never fun to think about death. However, a bit of planning can save loved ones a lot of trouble with business at a time when they will want to focus on family.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 30, 2023
Digital asset litigation is one of the most cutting-edge types of litigation in Thailand. There are factual, technical, regulatory, and legal challenges and hurdles for the parties to the dispute throughout all procedural stages. This is mainly because digital assets are different in nature from more conventional types of assets, as they are digitally created and used on a blockchain network. Legal Status The first issue to be aware of in approaching digital asset litigation is the legal status of digital assets. Under Thai law, there are two key terms concerning digital assets’ legal status: “thing” and “property.” Things are tangible objects, while property provides a much wider range of meaning. Property could be anything—including intangible objects that may be of value and able to be appropriated. It is fairly clear that digital assets are not a “thing” since they are not tangible. However, determining whether digital assets are “property” is even more complicated. Although digital assets are intangible objects, one might argue that, unlike fiat money, they do not have any inherent value but are rather conferred value based on certain people’s perspective. (For example, the Bank of Thailand expressed this opinion of bitcoin in 2014.) Some may even argue that digital assets cannot be possessed and therefore cannot be appropriated. According to these arguments, digital assets should not be regarded as a property either. Legal Grounds Determining whether digital assets are things, property, or something else altogether is crucial to any subsequent litigation. In Thailand, the party initiating the lawsuit (the plaintiff) generally has to state the relevant legal grounds for the complaint—that is, the different relevant legal provisions that the court is to apply to the case. These provisions of Thai laws mostly refer only to “things” or to “property,” not both. This often means that
Read More
March 21, 2023
From the perspective of a plaintiff (or a group of plaintiffs) considering initiating a class action in a Thai court, a primary benefit of proceeding as a class action is the ability to aggregate claims that would otherwise be too small or too costly to bring individually. Where one plaintiff might lack a claim large enough to make pursuing litigation a cost-effective option, the combined claims of many plaintiffs could surpass that threshold. Similarly, the prospect of representing a number of plaintiffs, along with the potential legal fees that could be awarded with a win, should serve as an incentive for counsel to represent a class of plaintiffs who, acting individually, would otherwise not be able to engage a lawyer interested in taking their case. For these same reasons, a defendant will most likely—although not necessarily always—oppose a plaintiff’s request that a case be allowed to proceed as a class action. From a defense perspective, preventing a case from proceeding as a class action could be a significant strategic goal, as it could mean that individual plaintiffs, as well as their counsel, would lack the financial incentive to pursue potentially costly litigation for their separate, relatively low-value claims. Potential defendants, therefore, may benefit considerably by understanding how a Thai court determines whether a case can proceed as a class action and, if it does, the potential options for a defendant that objects to this determination. The Court’s Initial Determination: Class Action or Ordinary Litigation? When a named plaintiff requests that a case proceed as a class action, that plaintiff must present the case to the court in accordance with the prerequisites stipulated by Thai law. The Civil Procedure Code (CPC) sets out the prerequisites for a case to proceed as a class action. Considerations include: whether the nature of
Read More
February 28, 2023
For most in-house counsel, the thought of defending a civil case brought against the company is typically an unpleasant proposition—even more so when the matter is proceeding in a foreign or unfamiliar jurisdiction in which the substantive law and court procedures differ from those in one’s home jurisdiction. But different procedures, even if unfamiliar, can sometimes be advantageous to a defendant. This is particularly true with respect to certain aspects of the discovery process in Thai civil court proceedings. For in-house counsel in certain jurisdictions, the specter of litigation not only entails the potential risks posed to the company and the time and financial costs inevitably incurred, it can also mean lengthy and costly discovery battles. However, as discussed in more detail below, due to the nature of Thai discovery procedures, these types of discovery battles are typically rare in Thai civil court proceedings. Further, due to the limited scope and mechanisms for discovery practice in Thailand, the whole discovery process tends to be rather expedient and straightforward, particularly when compared to that in jurisdictions with extensive discovery practice. In this article, the authors provide an overview of some of the more notable features of the process for discovery under the Thai Civil Procedure Code (“CPC”), particularly those that may differ from those in jurisdictions with a more vigorous and wide-reaching discovery process. (We note that this article addresses only discovery procedures in civil proceedings in Thai courts; the discovery process in criminal proceedings is subject to the Thai Criminal Procedure Code and differs from the process in civil courts in some respects.) Rules of Evidence Before taking a closer look at some of the discovery provisions in the CPC, it is important to understand a few fundamental principles of Thai evidence law, as these provide the general guidelines
Read More
February 24, 2023
On February 20, 2023, the Supreme People’s Court of Vietnam submitted a Practical Report on the Implementation of the Law on Organization of People’s Courts, as well as a Draft Amendment of the Law on Organization of People’s Courts to seek online comment from interested parties. Notably, the Supreme People’s Court has expressed a desire to establish specialized courts such as an IP court and a bankruptcy court. Practical Report on the Implementation of the Law on Organization of People’s Courts The Supreme People’s Court reviewed the implementation over the past eight years of the Law on Organization of People’s Courts (“LOPC”), which took effect in 2015. Some highlights of the implementation process, as set out in the Supreme People’s Court’s practical report, are as follows: Re-systematization of all levels of courts: The LOPC systematized the court system in Vietnam, including four levels: Supreme People’s Court Three Superior People’s Courts 765 first-instance trial courts (including 702 district courts and 63 provincial courts) 66 appellate courts (including 63 provincial people’s courts and the three Superior People’s Courts) In addition, the Supreme People’s Court established four adjudicating agencies for cassation and reopening (including three Judicial Committees of the Superior People’s Court and the Council of Judges of the Supreme People’s Court). Support departments for the court have been strengthened, and policies have been developed to train judges. Trial results: From June 1, 2015, to April 30, 2022, the courts have settled 3,187,285 cases of all kinds out of a total of 3,334,915 cases handled (95.57%). Most of the remaining cases are newly accepted and still within the time limit for settlement as prescribed by law. On average, the courts have had to deal with about 476,416 cases each year. Draft Amendment of Law on Organization of People’s Courts Despite the notable
Read More