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 1, 2019

The Reach and Liabilities of the Personal Data Protection Act

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post: Human Resources Watch

Earlier this year, Thailand enacted its Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), which was published in the Government Gazette on 27 May 2019. Most parts of the PDPA will become effective one year after this, on 27 May 2020. As the PDPA will have broad impact across multiple aspects of most businesses—including their human resources operations—lawmakers provided this one-year period for those affected to prepare for compliance with the PDPA.

While the definitions and mechanics of the law in relation to HR operations were covered in a previous Human Resource Watch column (29 April 2019), this article will take a closer look at the civil, criminal, and administrative penalties applicable in the event of non-compliance with the PDPA.

It is important for employers to understand that these liabilities apply to them even if they outsource their company’s HR work. Some employers misunderstand that if they turn over their HR functions to an HR service provider, the employer will not have any liability under the PDPA. Indeed, even if HR functions are outsourced, the employer will still have the same liabilities under the PDPA if the HR service provider breaches the PDPA.

For instance, if an employer assigns an outsourced provider to manage the paying of wages and calculation of social security deductions, where the providers must collect, use or disclose the personal information of employees, both the employer and the HR service provider will be acting in roles defined by the PDPA. In this scenario, the employer would be considered a ‘data controller’, while the HR service provider would be considered a ‘data processor.’ Therefore, both the employer and the HR service provider will have potential liability under the PDPA.

If the employer or HR service provider violates a PDPA provision, such as selling employees’ personal information to a financial institution or other third party without the employees’ consent, the employer as data controller would not only be liable for paying compensation to the employees who own the personal information, but could also face criminal penalties and administrative liability under the PDPA. In addition, the HR service provider, as a data processor, could face civil liability.

The PDPA provides for three types of potential liability for violation of its provisions:

1. Civil Liability

Employers or HR service providers who are found to have violated the PDPA must pay compensation to the employees who own the personal information and who received damages from the violation, regardless of whether the violation was done intentionally or negligently, except where the offender can prove that the damages were caused by force majeure or the employees’ own actions. In addition, offenders who can prove that the violation was a result of their compliance with an order of a government officer exercising his or her duties under the law will not be liable. The compensation includes all necessary expenses associated with actual or likely damages, whether for purposes of prevention or mitigation.

In addition, the court is entitled to award punitive civil damages, up to two times the amount of actual damages.

The prescription period for claiming compensation under the PDPA is three years from the date that the employees who own the personal information became aware of the violation and the identity of the offenders, or ten years from the date on which the violation of the personal data took place.

2. Criminal liability

If an employer as data controller violates the PDPA by the use or disclosure of personal information without consent in a manner that is likely to cause the other person to suffer any damages, impair his or her reputation, or other reason, the offender will face imprisonment of up to six months, a fine of up to Baht 500,000, or both.

In addition, if the offender uses or discloses personal information in order to receive unlawful benefits (or secure benefits for others), the criminal penalties that the offender will face include imprisonment for up to one year, a fine of up to Baht 1 million, or both.

The criminal offence under the PDPA is a compoundable offence, which means that it can be settled by negotiation and agreement between the parties before a court issues a final judgment.

In a case where the offender is a juristic person and the offence occurs as a result of the order or act of any director, manager, or other person in a role of responsibility, those persons must be liable for the relevant penalties. Likewise, these persons can also be penalized for their omission of an instruction or act resulting in the commission of the offence by the juristic person.

3. Administrative liability

The PDPA also imposes administrative liability on any offender in the form of an administrative fine from Baht 500,000 to Baht 5 million, depending on the nature of the violation. The PDPA establishes an expert committee with the authority to order offenders to pay an administrative fine, issue an order for rectification, or issue a warning to the offender. In determining whether to impose an administrative fine, the expert committee will consider the severity of the circumstances of the offence, the size of the business of the data controller (e.g., an employer) or data processor (e.g., HR service provider or HR department), or other circumstances.

It is possible that specific classes of data controller could be exempted from the application of all or part of the provisions of the PDPA (in addition to the excepted activities, on which see the previous article on this topic). However, these exemptions would have to be made by royal decree.

As it stands now, though, exceptions for classes of person have not been promulgated, and employers should not expect that they will be automatically exempt from PDPA compliance. Recent news from Europe of companies being heavily fined for their violations of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (upon which much of the PDPA is based) underline the dangers of continuing to neglect the protection of personal data. With Thailand only months away from joining the EU and other jurisdictions around the world in implementing a robust data protection regime, businesses must ensure the compliance of all of their operations—including in-house or outsourced HR functions—to avoid such costly penalties.

 

This article was originally published in the Bangkok Post and is reproduced here with permission and thanks. The original story can be viewed on the Bangkok Post website.

Related Professionals

Practices

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

November 24, 2021
Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins have provided the latest update to the Thailand contribution to Doing Business in…, a Q&A-style guide published by Thomson Reuters Practical Law that presents an overview of the legal framework for doing business in 63 jurisdictions worldwide. The Thailand chapter of the guide outlines Thailand’s legal system and key laws applicable to foreign companies doing business in the country. The chapter specifically covers the following main topics: Legal system: Thailand’s court system and codified legal system. Foreign investment: Lists of reserved business activities, restrictions on doing business with certain jurisdictions, exchange controls and currency regulations, and grants and incentives available to investors. Business vehicles: Ordinary partnerships, registered ordinary partnerships, limited partnerships, private limited companies, and public companies. Environment: Main laws and regulations, factory operation. Employment: Laws, employment contract requirements, work permits, and termination and redundancy. Tax: Taxes on employment, tax and nontax resident employees and businesses, corporate income tax, value added tax, special business tax, municipal tax, stamp duty, dividends, interest, intellectual property royalties. Competition: Important aspects of Thailand’s regulatory regime surrounding competition, centered around the updated Trade Competition Act. Antibribery and corruption: Laws, compliance requirements, regulatory authority. Intellectual property: Patents, trademarks, registered and unregistered designs, and copyright. Marketing agreements and advertising: Regulation of marketing agreements, Thailand’s Consumer Protection Act, direct marketing, role of the Consumer Protection Board and Food and Drug Administration. E-commerce: E-commerce laws and regulations, marketing and sales via online platforms. Data protection: An outline of Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act. Product liability: Procedures and regulations for product liability and product safety, including the Unsafe Goods Liability Act and the Consumer Case Procedure Act. Product liability: Key regulatory authorities for trade competition, environmental issues, and financial services. To browse, download, or print the Thailand chapter, please visit the Practical Law website.
Read More
October 25, 2021
Michael Ramirez, a counsel in Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution group in Bangkok, has updated the firm’s contribution to the Global Attorney-Client Privilege Guide, published by Lex Mundi. The newly expanded guide provides information on what constitutes attorney-client privilege in over 70 countries around the world. The Thailand section of the guide contains in-depth information on the function and applications of attorney-client privilege in Thailand (or, as explained in the guide, an equivalent concept enshrined in Thai law), including coverage of the following topics: Privilege in corporations Common interest doctrine Litigation funding Crime-fraud exception Work product doctrine/litigation privilege Other privileges including mediation, accountant-client and settlement negotiation The interactive guide features expert contributions by Lex Mundi member firms from jurisdictions worldwide. Readers can browse the contributions, generate country-specific reports, and compare attorney-client privilege in multiple jurisdictions. For more information, please visit the Lex Mundi website.
Read More
October 14, 2021
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has published an updated edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand for 2021. This guide outlines all of the key factors for starting and operating a business in the Thai market. Issues covered include: Investment incentives Financial facilities Exchange controls Import and export regulations Structures for doing business Requirements for the Establishment of a Business Operation of the Business Cessation or Termination of the Business Labor legislation, relations, and supply Tax Immigration requirements This publication is part of Lex Mundi’s Guides to Doing Business series prepared by member firms in more than 100 jurisdictions worldwide. The guides serve as a useful resource when planning an international business strategy or researching a new market.
Read More
September 13, 2021
Businesses in Vietnam recognize the need to vaccinate their workers in order to keep their factories and workplaces open. In this article, we explore whether employers may require their employees to be vaccinated, as well as associated disclosure and privacy issues under Vietnamese law.
Read More