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

August 7, 2015

Marrying a Thai Citizen Is a Straightforward Affair

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Thailand is a popular tourist destination attracting millions of foreigners to its vibrant cities and windswept shores each year. While many of these foreigners fall in love with the food, others fall in love with the people. Fortunately for those who are love-struck, getting married in Thailand is an easy process, as the country has a well-established system for foreigners to marry Thai citizens.

To illustrate how the process works, we will look at the lives of David and Suda, a fictional couple who would like to marry under Thai law.

Background

David, a U.S. citizen, fell in love with Suda, who is a Thai citizen. As David’s time in Thailand was coming to a close, he realized that he did not want his relationship with Suda to end. He wanted a real future for the relationship. Suda, upon hearing this, was thrilled. She had been dreading David’s departure and hoped to cement their relationship.

In order to move forward with their marriage, David and Suda must comply with certain procedures and requirements and provide certain documents when registering their marriage at the district office.

Preparations

David must obtain an Affirmation of Freedom to Marry. This can be obtained at a foreigner’s national embassy or consulate in Bangkok. Since David is a U.S. citizen, he must go to the U.S. embassy. David must bring his passport and is required to prove through a divorce or death certificate that any previous marriage has been legally dissolved.

After David obtains the Affirmation of Freedom to Marry, he must go to a translation office to translate it into Thai. Afterward, this must be approved by a consular official in the Legalization Division of the Foreign Ministry’s Consular Affairs Department.

As Suda is more than 20 years old, she must bring her original ID card and an original Certificate of House Registration along with copies of each to the district office.

Prenuptial Agreements

David is a cautious person and so wants to enter into a prenuptial agreement before marrying Suda. His parents went through an ugly divorce, as they could not agree on how to divide their assets. David wants to ensure he avoids such a situation.

A prenuptial agreement must be made in accordance with Thai law so that it is enforceable in the event of a divorce. It must be made in writing, written in Thai, signed in front of two witnesses prior to the marriage and registered at the local district office at the time the couple register their marriage.

David and Suda should seek legal consultation to draft their prenuptial agreement in accordance with Thai law as outlined in the Civil and Commercial Code of Thailand.

The Marriage

After all of the preparatory administrative and legal requirements have been fulfilled, David and Suda can get legally married.

They simply need to go to the local district office to register their marriage legally. David must bring his Affirmation of Freedom to Marry, an authenticated translation, his passport, and an authenticated copy of his passport. Suda must bring her original ID card and Certificate of House Registration along with copies of each and proof that any previous marriages have been legally dissolved.

However, as much as David and Suda would like to celebrate their marriage with friends and family and embark on their honeymoon, the administrative process is not over yet.

The marriage certificate that is issued to them by the local district office is in Thai. This must be translated into English, and the translation must be certified by the Foreign Ministry. The certified and translated marriage certificate must then be brought to the U.S. embassy to report the marriage.

After registering their marriage at the U.S. embassy, David and Suda can finally take off to Phuket to celebrate their marriage and live happily ever after.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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
September 25, 2025
Four of Tilleke & Gibbins’ labor and employment specialists in Phnom Penh have authored the Cambodia chapter of Labor and Employment Disputes 2026, the latest edition of Lexology Panoramic’s global guide to handling labor and employment disputes. The chapter provides practical insights on a wide range of dispute resolution issues, including: 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 full Cambodia chapter is available for download below. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Thailand 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
September 10, 2025
Under Thai law, authorized directors stand as a company’s mind and will and, as such, may incur personal criminal liability for acts or omissions committed in the course of company business. When allegations surface, directors must be prepared for the practical reality that, before guilt or innocence is ever adjudicated, they could be deprived of liberty unless bail release is promptly achieved through the competent legal authority. When Bail Can Be Granted Two procedural moments trigger the need to consider bail. The first arises during the investigative phase, when a claim is lodged against a director with the competent law enforcement authorities. Upon receipt of a complaint, the assigned inquiry officer summons the director for questioning, compiles evidence, and ultimately forwards a prosecution or nonprosecution recommendation to the public prosecutor. Although the public prosecutor retains ultimate discretion to indict an accused director, the police or prosecutor may conclude that pretrial detention is necessary and may therefore apply to the court for an order to hold the director in court custody. The second moment occurs after a criminal case is filed directly with the court. This occurs once a court accepts a criminal case filed by a prosecutor against a director or, alternatively, when the court accepts a case filed by an individual for trial. For cases filed by individuals, the plaintiff presents prima facie evidence at the preliminary hearing, and the court will accept the complaint if it finds sufficient grounds, thereby conferring upon the director the status of a criminal defendant. Upon acceptance of the criminal case, the court then has the inherent authority to order custody pending trial unless the defendant secures bail release. Procedural Considerations Experienced litigants typically prepare bail security in advance and submit a bail petition at the earliest possible time. While there are
Read More
September 4, 2025
On June 6, 2025, the Superior People’s Court in Hanoi overturned a non-use cancellation decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam, a rare and impactful occurrence. In a ruling that may help clarify the enforcement of Vietnam’s IP Law, the court held that valid trademark use can be established through commercial arrangements where the brand owner maintains actual control over the use of the mark, and is not confined to relationships governed by a so-called “formal license agreement. Background: Cross-Border Use, Local Challenge A Singapore company owns a well-known brand of consumer products that has gained recognition across Southeast Asia. In recent years, the brand has been targeted by several unauthorized trademark filings in Vietnam. In one such instance, a local Vietnamese trading company—previously linked to the production and export of counterfeit goods to neighboring countries—filed a non-use cancellation against the Singapore company’s mark and sought to register it under its own name. If the cancellation had been upheld, it would have enabled a complete hijacking of the brand. The IP holder operates in Vietnam through a structured cross-border supply chain. Under an agreement between two related foreign entities, one of which managed regional operations, production orders were placed through a designated Vietnamese company. While the Vietnamese manufacturer was not a party to the agreement, its role in using the mark was recognized and governed by internal and commercial documentation. The Vietnamese manufacturer lawfully obtained the necessary permits, regulatory approvals, and customs clearances for producing the goods in Vietnam. These activities were supported by banking records and internal communications, evidencing active, continuous use of the mark in Vietnam. However, the IP Office concluded that this use did not meet the statutory criteria because the Vietnamese manufacturer did not have a direct license agreement with the brand owner, as
Read More