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

October 16, 2017

Inheritance of Leasehold Property in Thailand

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

With its beautiful beaches, scenic mountains, and bustling cities, Thailand has long enjoyed a reputation as a popular tourist destination. At the same time, the country has also become an attractive hotspot for foreign nationals wishing to buy property

With a plethora of options—from convenient condominiums in downtown Bangkok, to lodges high up in the serene mountains of northern Thailand, to luxurious villas and apartments situated idyllically beside the Andaman Sea—more and more foreigners are clamoring to either settle down in Thailand or invest in the burgeoning property market.

But foreign investors face a well-known obstacle to making their dreams come true: the Thai Land Code forbids for foreigners, whether individuals or companies, to buy or hold land in Thailand, unless they obtain permission from certain governmental authorities (e.g., the Board of Investment or the Industrial Estate Authority of Thailand).

Despite these land ownership restrictions, the Condominium Act does permit foreigners to own units in condominium projects, provided such foreign ownership does not exceed 49% of the total area of all the units in the project.

There are also no regulations prohibiting foreigners from leasing property. Therefore, leasehold is the most popular type of legal structure for foreigners who wish to own other types of real estate, such as a plot of land with a house or a villa.

Under Thai law, all leases for immovable property must be made in writing, and agreements exceeding three years must be registered with the Land Office where the property is located; otherwise, the agreement will only be enforceable for three years. Under the Civil and Commercial Code, the maximum duration for a lease of property is 30 years, with an option to renew for another 30 years. However, the option to renew is treated as a private agreement between the respective parties.

Another issue to consider is that, as a general principle, one of the material elements of a lease agreement is that it must be specific to the lessee who is named in the lease agreement, and thus the lessee’s qualifications are a material consideration for obtaining a lease.

Previous Supreme Court judgments have noted that the lessor generally focuses their consideration on the qualifications of the lessee, and whether such lessee has the right to use and maintain the leased property. As the lessee’s rights are exclusive to each lessee, the lease will therefore automatically be terminated upon the death of the lessee.

For this reason, the current trend for some investors is to consider investing in a leasehold property through a company, as it is convenient to transfer the company’s shares to the investor’s heir(s), without the need to proceed with a new lease registration.

However, a recent Supreme Court Judgment No. 11058/2559, which has been approved by the general assembly of the Supreme Court, raised an important issue. The Court held that if parties intend to obtain the exclusive rights of a lessee or a lessor, and they wish to terminate the lease agreement upon the death of the lessee or lessor, such agreement must specify the duration of the lease to enable it to be effective throughout the life of the lessee or lessor.

If the duration of the lease is not for the entire life of the lessee or lessor, it will be deemed that the parties agree to waive their exclusive rights, and thus the lease will not be terminated upon the death of either party.

The Supreme Court also noted that some clauses specified in a lease agreement can be interpreted to mean that the lessor has waived their exclusive rights. For example, this may occur when the lease duration is for a 30-year period, and the lessor has received a one-time rental fee for the entire duration of the lease upon commencement of the lease, or the lessor allowed the lessee to sub-lease the property to a third party without prior consent of the lessor.

The Supreme Court viewed that the inclusion of these clauses was indicative of the fact that the lessor did not consider the lessee’s qualifications to be the material elements of the lease agreement. The Court further stated that the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties, such as the duration of a lease, will be enforceable upon entering into a lease agreement and will persist in accordance with the terms stipulated in the agreement, which means that the lease will not be automatically terminated upon the death of the lessee, and can also be inherited by the lessee’s heir(s).

The Supreme Court’s decision on these issues appears to differ in some ways from previous judgments, and it will be important to monitor how the particular facts and circumstances of other upcoming cases will be interpreted. When entering into a new lease, all parties involved will want to ensure that the lease agreement has been correctly drafted to enable them to retain full legal rights and protection over the property.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 30, 2026
Thailand’s Long-Term Resident (LTR) Visa regime offers an attractive immigration pathway for qualifying foreign nationals, providing a 10-year renewable permission to stay in Thailand. Following amendments under Board of Investment (BOI) Announcement No. Por. 3/2568 dated February 4, 2025, the regime now more explicitly accommodates property investment as a qualifying vehicle—a development of particular relevance to foreign nationals already considering real estate acquisitions in Thailand. The LTR Visa is available to several categories of applicants, including wealthy global citizens with global assets of at least USD 1 million, and wealthy pensioners aged 50 or older with an annual pension or fixed income of at least USD 40,000. Property as a Qualifying Investment For both categories, property investment is recognized as one of three eligible investment types alongside Thai government bonds (with at least five years remaining to maturity) and direct investments in Thai companies or approved venture capital or private equity vehicles. The minimum qualifying property investment is USD 500,000 for wealthy global citizens and USD 250,000 for wealthy pensioners. Eligible property types include freehold condominiums, buildings, or villas, as well as leasehold properties with a remaining lease term of at least 10 years. Health Coverage Requirement Beyond the investment threshold, applicants must demonstrate adequate health coverage. This requirement can be satisfied through a health insurance policy covering at least USD 50,000 in Thai medical expenses with at least 10 months of remaining coverage, evidence of social security benefits covering Thai medical costs, or a bank deposit of at least USD 100,000 retained for 12 months. Practical Considerations For foreign nationals already considering property acquisitions in prime residential markets—where investment values commonly meet or exceed the USD 500,000 threshold—the visa pathway effectively transforms a real estate purchase into a dual-purpose investment, combining asset ownership with long-term residence rights that
April 7, 2026
Real estate law specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins provided the chapter on Vietnam for Practical Law’s Commercial Real Estate Global Guide 2026, a comparative jurisdictional guide in Q&A format giving a high-level overview of real estate investment structures, restrictions on foreign ownership, and other important issues of real estate law. The main topics include the following: Real estate investment Title to real estate Sale of real estate Real estate tax Real estate finance Real estate leases Planning and development controls To read the Vietnam chapter, please visit the Practical Law website and enroll in the free Practical Law trial to gain full access.
February 25, 2026
In December 2025, the National Assembly of Vietnam enacted a new Law on Construction, replacing the 2014 Law on Construction as amended in 2020. The 2025 Law on Construction will, in principle, take effect on July 1, 2026, subject to certain exceptions. Among its notable reforms, one development has attracted particular attention from both legal practitioners and market participants: the introduction of a statutory framework governing predetermined damages, commonly referred to as “liquidated damages.” This marks the first time liquidated damages have been expressly recognized at the level of primary legislation in Vietnam. While liquidated damages clauses have long been a common feature of construction contracts in practice, their legal enforceability has historically been subject to uncertainty. Although the new provision appears to represent a positive step toward greater legal clarity, it remains an open question whether it is sufficient, on its own, to provide a solid legal basis for the enforceability of liquidated damages clauses in construction disputes in Vietnam. What’s New? Article 86.2 of the 2025 Law on Construction provides (emphasis added): “Compensation for damages shall be determined on the basis of actual damages [or] predetermined damages corresponding to obligations under the construction contracts that are breached [and] the extent of such breaches.” This provision is significant in that it expressly recognizes predetermined damages, or liquidated damages, as a lawful basis for determining compensation for damage. However, the new law does not define “predetermined damages.” The absence of a statutory definition creates potential ambiguity as to the scope and nature of this concept and may give rise to disputes over how—and whether—a particular contractual clause qualifies as predetermined damages for the purposes of Article 86.2. Further, Article 86.2 qualifies the application of predetermined damages by requiring that such damages correspond to the obligations not fulfilled and the
January 20, 2026
Thailand’s Board of Investment (BOI) has imposed new restrictions on foreign-majority shareholding and land ownership for companies in certain promoted activities. The changes took effect on September 1, 2025, but were not published in the Government Gazette until December 30, 2025, under Notification of the Board of Investment No. Sor. 7/2568 on the Amendment to List of Activities Eligible for Investment Promotion under Notification of the Board of Investment No. 9/2565, dated July 22, 2025. Foreign Land Ownership Restrictions Generally, foreign land ownership is one of the privileges granted to BOI-promoted companies, allowing them to own land to engage in the promoted activities. However, with these new restrictions, the BOI will no longer grant land-ownership privileges to foreign-majority-owned companies that conduct business activities in the following categories: Rolling, drawing, casting, or forging of nonferrous metals (category 5.4.9) Manufacturing of ferrous metal products or ferrous metal parts (category 5.4.11.2) Manufacturing of nonferrous metal products and/or nonferrous metal parts for industrial use (category 5.4.11.4) Manufacturing of other metal products, including other metal parts for industrial use (category 5.4.11.5) Manufacture of chemical products for industry (category 6.2) Manufacture of plastic products for industrial goods and parts (category 6.4.1) These restrictions do not apply to existing BOI-promoted companies that have at least three projects granted promotion under the same juristic person during the past 15 years (2011–2025) with total investment of at least THB 5 billion, excluding the cost of land and working capital. Foreign Shareholding Restrictions For companies to be eligible for BOI promotion in three other categories of business activities, at least 51% of the company’s registered capital must be held by Thai individual shareholders, unless the BOI-promoted activity is located within a special border economic zone as designated by the BOI. These three categories are: Manufacture of bags made of