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

November 13, 2025

Legal Options for Addressing Challenges with Land Matters in Thailand

Subscribe to Updates

The Land Department in Thailand’s Ministry of the Interior (MOI) plays a central role in ensuring the stability and legality of real estate transactions in the country. Its core responsibilities include issuing land title deeds, registering transactions (e.g., sales, mortgages, leases), conducting surveys for subdivision or consolidation of land, and providing information and guidance on land and property development laws.

These administrative functions secure investor confidence and support transparency in the Thai property market, so any delay can have a significant impact. This is especially true for investors who depend on timely registration to secure or transfer property rights. Delays can create liquidity risks, postpone project timelines, and even reduce Thailand’s attractiveness as a real estate investment destination.

This article explores the nature of these challenges, the legal framework governing the timelines for administrative actions, and remedies available under Thai law.

Sources of Delay

Procedural delays at land offices can arise for a variety of structural and operational reasons. These include approval processes that require several levels of internal review, heavy staff workloads, and occasional communication gaps within the bureaucratic chain. Many processes still rely upon manual documentation, which can prolong administrative steps and increase the likelihood of bottlenecks.

Some delays stem from ongoing investigations into the legality of land titles. For example, a land title deed may have an annotation indicating that the title deed is under investigation to verify its legality. Even though this annotation does not legally prohibit the sale or transfer of the land, in practice, most prospective purchasers are reluctant to proceed with a transaction until the annotation is removed. As a result, the land can become effectively illiquid during the investigation period, leading to significant investment delays.

While such investigations are essential to maintaining the integrity of Thailand’s land registration system, prolonged inquiries without clear timelines can affect investor confidence and obstruct legitimate commercial activity.

Timelines for Administrative Action

Thailand has taken important steps to address concerns about bureaucratic delays by enacting legal instruments that impose procedural timelines on government agencies, including the Land Department. Two of these are outlined below.

Act on the Determination of Timeframes in the Justice Process B.E. 2565 (2022)

The Act on the Determination of Timeframes in the Justice Process B.E. 2565 (2022) requires all government agencies under the MOI, including the Land Department, to establish and publicly announce clear timelines for the completion of administrative tasks. Affected agencies must ensure that these timelines are accessible and understandable to the public. If an official cannot complete a process within a prescribed timeline, he or she must record the reason for the delay, specify the estimated completion date, and notify relevant parties. A record must also be available for verification and audit.

Land Code

The Land Code sets a specific timeline for investigations concerning irregularities in land title issuance. Once an investigation has been ordered, it must be completed within sixty days. An investigation committee may recommend extending this period for up to an additional sixty days, if necessary, by issuing a report, after which a Land Department Officer or authorized delegate must issue a final decision within fifteen days.

These provisions are designed to ensure that inquiries do not remain pending indefinitely. However, the law also allows the investigation period to be extended when deemed “necessary,” and the law does not explicitly specify how many times such an extension may be granted. In practice, therefore, officers may consider granting an extension more than once.  This discretionary flexibility can contribute to prolonged or unpredictable delays.

Available Remedies

If the Land Department’s action or inaction causes undue delay, affected parties have the right to claim damages and seek revocation of unlawful orders issued by officials. Thai law provides several administrative and judicial remedies to expedite or rectify such a situation.

 Administrative Complaints to Expedite the Process

  • Damrongdhama Center: Individuals can submit complaints through the MOI’s Damrongdhama Center (a complaint-handling unit) either in person, by post, via telephone hotline, through a mobile application, or online.
  • Direct complaint to the Land Department: Parties may file a petition directly with a Land Department officer or with the provincial or branch Land Office responsible for the area in which the matter arose.

These channels can prompt internal reviews and often help move pending matters forward.

Civil and Administrative Claims for Damages

  • Civil liability: Under Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code, a person who suffers loss due to a wrongful act by an official may claim compensation. The Supreme Administrative Court has affirmed this principle.
  • Administrative liability: The State Officials Liability Act B.E. 2539 (1996) allows for claims against the state for wrongful acts (e.g., asking the court to revoke unlawful orders) committed by government officers in the course of their duties. Under the Administrative Procedure Act B.E. 2539 (1996), parties may also challenge unlawful or unreasonable administrative decisions or delays. The Administrative Court has ruled in several cases that excessive or unjustified delays can amount to administrative misconduct subject to judicial review.

Criminal Proceedings for Misconduct

In severe cases involving intentional wrongdoing or abuse of authority, criminal prosecution may be available under the Thai Penal Code, together with the Land Code.

Outlook: Remedies and Reform

The primary focus of legal remedies is to address individual cases rather than systemic inefficiencies. Delays involving land matters in Thailand, however, often reflect broader administrative challenges, such as limited resources, complex procedural requirements, and the need for modernization.

Sustainable reform therefore requires a systemic approach, as timely and predictable land administration will be able to sustain investor confidence and support the continued growth of Thailand’s real estate sector. Although legal mechanisms are in place to address delays, true efficiency depends on long-term administrative reform and digital modernization within the related government agencies.

Mindful of this broader context, investors or property owners facing prolonged delays or legal uncertainty should prepare necessary documentation, maintain clear communication with authorities, and seek proper professional legal assistance.

Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Real Estate

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 30, 2025
Thailand has introduced a comprehensive overhaul of its tax litigation procedures that will significantly impact how tax disputes are handled. The Regulations for Tax Cases B.E. 2568 (2025) take effect on November 24, 2025, and repeal the prior B.E. 2544 (2001) regulations in full. These regulations support the implementation of the Act on the Establishment of the Tax Court and Tax Case Procedure (No. 3) B.E. 2568 (2025), which expands the Tax Court’s jurisdiction to certain criminal tax matters. Published in the Government Gazette on October 14, 2025, the regulations have been reorganized into three parts covering civil cases, criminal cases, and forms, and are designed to accelerate proceedings, tighten evidentiary discipline, and modernize court operations. Structural Reform and Scope The prior regime governed only civil tax disputes. Under the new framework, the regulations introduce a dedicated chapter for criminal cases alongside updated civil procedures, as the Tax Court now has express authority to adjudicate specified criminal tax offenses. Select mechanisms applied in civil case proceedings, such as electronic communication, recording testimony, and appointing experts, also apply to criminal proceedings mutatis mutandis where they do not conflict with criminal procedure. Civil Cases: Evidence Submission, Deadlines, and Scheduling Parties must submit, together with the witness list, originals of all documentary evidence, media, or electronic data (such as files, USB drives, or CDs), and all physical evidence in the party’s possession. Failure to submit any original within the deadline (see below) results in a loss of the right to adduce that item at trial, subject only to narrow exceptions where submission is impossible due to force majeure or where receipt of the evidence is indispensable to the interests of justice. The practical impact is that parties are now obligated to assemble and verify all original documents and data at the very
Read More
October 24, 2025
The Thai Arbitration Institute (TAI), a division of Thailand’s Office of the Judiciary, has taken a step toward harmonizing the tools available for dispute resolution. On August 8, 2025, the institute formally launched the TAI Mediation Center (TAI-MC). Although the amendments to TAI’s Arbitration Rules that will govern the TAI-MC have not yet been finalized, the framework now under consideration suggests that TAI is positioning itself to become a more attractive venue for commercial dispute resolution. In the regime contemplated under the current version of the amendments, TAI proceedings will adopt an “arbitration-annexed mediation” mechanism—commonly termed the “Med-Arb” model—while preserving the procedural safeguards indispensable to arbitral neutrality. Mediation will be entrusted to a separate, dedicated mediator appointed under the TAI-MC who is precluded from serving on the arbitral tribunal in the same matter. By clearly separating the functions of mediator and arbitrator, the institute eliminates any risk that confidential information disclosed during mediation could influence the adjudicatory outcome if the parties do not settle. Only when all parties subsequently make a request may that same mediator assume arbitral duties in the case. The parties will retain substantial autonomy in selecting the mediator. They may either designate a mediator by mutual consent or invite the TAI-MC to appoint one from its authorized panel. TAI has announced its intention to curate that panel with particular emphasis on commercial expertise and cross-cultural negotiation skills, supplemented by ongoing professional training. Where the parties cannot agree on remuneration, the mediator’s fee will default to a tariff comparable to the TAI-MC’s cost schedule, which under the current version of the amendments will be approximately THB 45,000 for disputes in which the aggregate claims do not exceed THB 10 million, with incremental increases tied to higher claim values. This predictable cost matrix is aimed at enhancing
Read More
October 24, 2025
In Vietnam, litigation is generally treated as a last resort in dispute resolution. Businesses often strive to avoid court proceedings, given the potential for disrupted relationships, higher costs, and lengthy timelines. Yet, litigation is sometimes unavoidable, whether to secure a remedy or respond to a claim. Familiarity with Vietnam’s court system and procedures is therefore crucial for any party involved in such matters. Civil Litigation in Vietnam offers a concise overview of the country’s civil court system and litigation process. The guide a highlights essential points for navigating legal disputes in Vietnam, whether as a plaintiff or a defendant. Tilleke & Gibbins also publishes a similar guide for Thailand. The full Civil Litigation in Vietnam guide is available as a PDF through the button below.
Read More
September 25, 2025
In the Thailand contribution to Labor and Employment Disputes 2026, four members of Tilleke & Gibbins’ Bangkok labor and employment team outline key aspects of dispute resolution in Thailand. Their analysis, part of Lexology Panoramic’s comparative guide covering jurisdictions worldwide, addresses the following areas: Pre-action considerations: key requirements, third-party funding, contingency fee arrangements Issuing a claim: forum, territorial jurisdiction, standing, commencing claims, fees, service, defendants and legal personality, types of claims, time limits, counterclaims Case management: procedure, rules, amendments to claims, adding parties, consolidating proceedings, class and collective actions, evidence, witnesses, tactical considerations Interim relief: availability, requirements Trial: hearings conduct and time frames, confidentiality and public access, media reporting, elements of successful claims and burden of proof Alternative dispute resolution: available types, requirements and expectations, enforcement Collective employment and labor rights: enforcement and standing Remedies and enforcement: available remedies, assessing compensation, enforcement mechanisms Appeals: procedure, time frames, other means of challenge Updates and trends: recent cases and developments, technology developments, other issues The complete Thailand chapter can be downloaded below. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Cambodia and Vietnam chapters to Labor and Employment Disputes 2026. Readers can also gain 30 days of complementary access to the full Labor and Employment Disputes 2026 guide and the rest of Lexology Panoramic’s varied offerings through this link.
Read More