Thailand ratified the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards on December 21, 1959, with the Convention coming into force on March 20, 1960. This ratification was a significant step in aligning Thailand’s arbitration framework with international standards, facilitating the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the country. In Thailand, the enforcement of both domestic and international arbitral awards is governed by the Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002), which is based on the first version of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985 (as opposed to the latest version from 2006). However, unlike Australia, Hong Kong, and Singapore, Thailand is not an UNCITRAL Model Law country. While Thailand’s Arbitration Act is influenced by the UNCITRAL Model Law, it incorporates certain local contexts that require interpretation alongside Thai court rulings. The Arbitration Act also confirms the authority of arbitral tribunals to grant interim measures, reinforcing tribunals’ power in managing disputes effectively. Additionally, the act incorporates principles from the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958). This article explores the key procedural steps, timeframes, and practical challenges associated with the enforcement of arbitral awards under Thailand’s legal framework. Procedures for Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Thailand The enforcement of arbitral awards in Thailand follows the procedures outlined in the Arbitration Act: Application to the competent court: Under the Arbitration Act, parties seeking enforcement must submit a petition to the Thai courts within three years of the award having become enforceable. The application must include the original or certified copies of the arbitral award and the arbitration agreement, along with translations if necessary. In Thailand, the choice of court for filing the arbitral award depends on the nature of the disputed contract. If the contract concerns

On February 4, 2025, Thailand’s Board of Investment (BOI) issued Announcement No. Por. 3/2568, introducing updated qualifications, criteria, and conditions for long-term resident (LTR) visas. The updated requirements took effect immediately upon issuance of the announcement. The LTR program is intended to stimulate the economy and attract high-potential foreign nationals to Thailand, and these latest updates aim to expand access to a wider range of experts, investors, and executives to reinforce Thailand’s foreign talent pool and enhance its competitiveness. The recent updates primarily affect three categories under the LTR visa program: work-from-Thailand professionals, wealthy global citizens, and high-skilled professionals, as detailed below. Work-from-Thailand Professionals The updated LTR visa program includes some changes to the eligibility criteria for visa applicants in the work-from-Thailand professionals category: The revenue requirement for visa applicants’ employers is now USD 50 million over a three-year period, down from USD 150 million previously. Eligible foreign employers now include wholly owned subsidiaries of: companies listed on any stock exchange in any country; or private companies that have been in operation for at least three years and have generated a combined revenue of at least USD 50 million over the past three years. There are no longer work experience requirements. The other requirements remain the same. Wealthy Global Citizens For the wealthy global citizens category, the latest updates remove the requirement to have an annual personal income of USD 80,000, while the other criteria remain. Highly Skilled Professionals For the highly skilled professionals category, the latest updates expand eligibility to include lecturers in vocational or higher education, and remove work experience requirements. Other categories The updated LTR visa program does not introduce any changes for the wealthy pensioners category. However, the announcement does expand the scope of eligible dependents of LTR visa holders to cover parents and a

Vietnam’s political system is currently undergoing a significant reorganization to streamline government operations and improve efficiency. In this regard, Plan 141/KH-BCDTKNQ18, issued on December 6, 2024, provided guidelines on the restructuring of existing ministries, ministerial-level agencies, and government-affiliated agencies. Accordingly, the number of ministries is being reduced from 18 to 14 through mergers and consolidations and the establishment of a new Ministry of Ethnic and Religious Affairs. The number of ministerial-level agencies is being reduced to three, and government-affiliated agencies to five. Similar streamlining is happening at provincial levels. The newly consolidated state agencies will assume all functions, rights, and responsibilities of the merged entities, and will continue handling all ongoing matters previously handled by the former agencies. Some examples of these changes include the following: The Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) will oversee telecommunications, IT applications, cybersecurity, e-transactions, and national digital transformation, which had previously been managed by the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC). MOST will also be responsible for issuing licenses related to these areas, such as licenses for G1 online game services and telecommunication services. The Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism will assume the responsibility of press management, previously under the MIC. The Ministry of Finance will assume state management functions related to investment, previously handled by the Ministry of Planning and Investment. Provincial Departments of Finance will issue Investment Registration Certificates and Enterprise Registration Certificates, a responsibility previously held by the Departments of Planning and Investment. The Ministry of Home Affairs will oversee labor and employment matters. Provincial Departments of Home Affairs will be authorized to issue work permits and will be the designated authorities for companies to register their internal labor regulations. Advantages for Businesses The restructuring aims to simplify regulations and expedite licensing processes. By reducing the number of agencies

A proposal to establish a specialized Intellectual Property Court in Vietnam has been a topic of significant interest among IP practitioners for the past 20 years. It was thus a major breakthrough when the new Law on the Organization of People’s Courts was ratified in 2024, stipulating in Article 4.1(dd) that the Vietnamese court system would include a specialized first-instance IP Court. The new law took effect on January 1, 2025, replacing the Law on the Organization of People’s Courts of 2014, A groundbreaking law This breakthrough can be viewed from multiple perspectives. First of all, in terms of organization, this is the first time, after numerous considerations, that Vietnam has officially recognized the importance of the IP field and the need to establish a specialized adjudicative body due to the field’s unique nature. The establishment of a specialized first-instance IP Court is expected to lead to fundamental changes in the practice of developing and applying IP law. While the establishment of IP rights such as trademarks, patents, and plant varieties is managed by administrative agencies such as the Intellectual Property Office, the Copyright Office, and the Crop Production Department, which seem unlikely to change their functions and tasks, there could be significant changes in the enforcement of these rights, which has been a persistent issue in Vietnam’s IP law system. Thus far, in practice, the enforcement of IP rights in Vietnam has relied overwhelmingly on administrative measures over civil measures. Civil measures, typically involving court proceedings under which the matter will be submitted to a court for settlement, are not appealing to disputing parties, especially IP rights owners. The absence of a specialized court has led to many IP cases being handled by judges without any knowledge or experience in this specialized field, resulting in confusion, misconceptions about