Thailand Certifies First Class Action

February 27, 2018

Thailand Certifies First Class Action

In what is thought to be the first order certifying a class under Thailand’s recently enacted class action legislation, the Act to Amend the Civil Procedure Code (Number 26) B.E. 2558 (the “Act”), the Civil Court in Bangkok has issued an order in case Black No.SorWor.4/2560 against Wax Garbage Recycle Center Co., Ltd. and others, granting the lead plaintiffs’ request for the case to proceed as a class action.

The case was brought against an industrial waste recycling operator in Ratchaburi province, claiming personal injury, property damage, and agricultural business interruption losses arising from alleged environmental breaches. Three lead plaintiffs claimed to represent a class of a village containing over 100 households, represented by Mr. Somchai Armeen, president of the Legal Right and Environmental Protection Association (LEPA).

In its order, the court did not give any detailed consideration to the five tests for certification set down in Section 222/12 of the Amended Code, but in a reference to the language of that section, made a broad finding that it was satisfied that if the proceeding was to be undertaken as an ordinary case it would cause an inconvenience, and that the background and experience of the three lead plaintiffs and their lawyer were sufficient to adequately and fairly protect the rights of the group.

The order certifying the class defines group members briefly as “persons having domicile and occupation in the area […] during the period of 2001 to 2017,” potentially giving rise to a large class of members as well as disputes over interpretation.

The certification order was not appealed by the defendants and has now become final. The court must now make a public announcement of the order, which must be published for three consecutive days in daily newspapers and other media, and which must contain a summary of the complaint, details of the certification order and the definition of the class, information on the rights of class members, and a specified period of not less than 45 days for class members to opt out. The case will then proceed to trial on liability and quantum in accordance with the case management procedures set down in the Act.

Background and Comment

The Act came into effect in December 2015. Modelled primarily on the U.S. class action regime, the Act amended the Thai Civil Procedure Code to implement a fully-fledged opt-out class action procedure for the first time in Thailand.

Significantly, unlike some other jurisdictions which have implemented class action or collective redress regimes in recent years, the Act does not limit the application of the procedure to certain narrow fields of law, or require the involvement of consumer protection agencies or other representative bodies to initiate proceedings. The mechanism is available to any lead plaintiff and their attorney for a wide range of claims for legal redress, which may be based on general tort or breach of contract principles, or other laws including those relating to environmental protection, consumer protection, labor, securities and stock exchange, and trade competition. The Act is therefore of potentially very broad application.

The Act has been somewhat slow to take off, but other actions currently pending certification include a similar claim for environmental damages against the Australian operators of a gold mine in central Thailand, (also the subject of a bilateral investment treaty arbitration with the Thai Government), a claim for false advertising on behalf of potentially 500,000 purchasers of imported frying pans, and a class action suit against Ford Motor Company that was apparently closely modelled on similar proceedings in Australia.

The court’s apparently broad-brush approach to applying the certification test in this case may now well encourage further suits to be filed. However, the real test of whether Thailand’s nascent class actions industry will take off will come when the courts’ approach to costs awards becomes known. The Act empowers the courts to make an award of costs to successful plaintiffs’ attorneys of up to 30 percent of the damages awarded, which are to be paid by defendants in addition to damages, rather than deducted from class members’ compensation. If the courts show a willingness to make costs awards at or near these levels, Thailand may very well follow in the steps of the United States and Australia to become the Asia Pacific’s leading consumer litigation destination. In the meantime the risks are escalating and international operators and their insurers should continue to monitor the situation.

Related Professionals

Aaron Le Marquer

Partner and Deputy Director, Dispute Resolution

Thailand

+66 2056 5555

Email

RELATED INSIGHTS

March 19, 2026

Thailand’s Digital Platform Services Regulatory Roadmap for 2026

Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA), which describes itself as a “co-creation regulator” working collaboratively with industry rather than imposing top-down rules, has unveiled its regulatory roadmap for digital platform businesses under the Royal Decree on Digital Platform Service Businesses B.E. 2565 (2022). The 2026 regulatory approach is guided by three core principles—“practicable, verifiable, shared responsibility”—aimed at elevating digital services to be safe, transparent, and fair. These principles inform ETDA’s 2026 priorities, which focus on three key dimensions: product and service standards on platforms, fair competition and fee transparency, and online fraud prevention. Product and Service Standards ETDA’s 2026 agenda addresses product and service standards across several platform categories: Online marketplace platforms. The Notification on Additional Measures for Online Marketplace Platforms under Section 18(2) came into force on December 31, 2025, designating 21 marketplace platforms that must verify products and merchants. Among other obligations, covered platforms must remove or suspend substandard products under the “notice and take down” principle. The ETDA has collaborated with the Food and Drug Administration and the Thai Industrial Standards Institute to develop inspection manuals and coordinate compliance procedures. Social commerce. The ETDA is preparing a new notification under Section 18(2) specifically targeting social commerce platforms with sales support functions, aiming to align regulation with evolving digital market conditions. Ride sharing. Since the postponement of the deadline to comply with the ETDA’s notification on ride-sharing platforms to March 31, 2026, the ETDA has supported drivers in registering with the Department of Land Transport through the Driver Verify registration system, which has already issued certifications to approximately 27,900 riders. The ETDA is also examining structural issues relating to appropriate insurance packages, motorcycle engine capacity expansion, and fair leasing fees and contract transfer costs in coordination with the Department of Land Transport, the Office of Insurance Commission,

March 12, 2026

Thailand’s Advertising Guidelines Targeting AI-Generated Content

Thailand’s AI legislative framework took another step forward when the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) issued a notification establishing guidelines for AI-generated advertising that may cause material misunderstanding about products or services. The notification, which is already in effect, was issued under the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979) and its amendments, which prohibit advertising that is unfair to consumers or may cause harm to society, including false or exaggerated statements and statements that may cause material misunderstanding about products or services. The notification addresses emerging advertising practices, including the use of images edited using software or AI to attract consumer interest or build credibility. The OCPB noted that such advertising may result in consumers misunderstanding the essential characteristics, condition, or usage of products, which violates consumer rights and causes damage. Key Requirements on AI-Generated or Digitally Manipulated Advertising Content For advertisements using still images or videos created or edited with software programs or AI tools that may cause the depicted product or service to differ from the actual product sold or service provided—which may cause misunderstanding regarding the condition, quality, quantity, or other essential aspects of the products or services—advertisers and business operators must comply with the following requirements: Prior authorization. Obtain approval from relevant regulatory authorities where required by law. Accurate representation. Ensure that the advertised size, quantity, volume, number, or composition matches the actual product or service being sold, whether in still images or videos. Mandatory AI disclosure labels. Display clear disclosures when AI or software is used to create or edit images, such as: “Real image or simulation edited using AI” “Photo from actual location or simulation edited using AI” “Photo from actual product or edited simulation” “Image created by AI” “Video created by AI” Clarity of disclosure. Ensure disclosures are clearly visible,

March 9, 2026

EV Liability under Thailand’s Product Liability Law

Over the past several years, numerous automobile manufacturers have brought electric vehicles (EVs) to the market and received positive feedback from consumers in Thailand and around the world. EVs have gained popularity due to their lower maintenance costs, reduced energy expenses, and environmental benefits. However, reports have emerged of EVs causing problems such as battery fires, autopilot malfunctions leading to accidents, and safety systems such as brakes engaging automatically under inappropriate conditions. Even when these situations do not cause injury to drivers or passengers, they raise significant concerns for EV manufacturers, importers, and sellers operating in Thailand. These problems may seriously impact businesses if the products are identified as unsafe under Thailand’s Product Liability Act (PLA), officially known as the Liability for Damages Arising from Unsafe Products Act. Under this law, authorities or courts can order business operators to recall products from the market or prohibit their export, import, or sale. To manage and mitigate the risk of being found liable for damages due to an unsafe product under the PLA, EV business operators should be aware of the scope of the law. Potentially Liable Parties The PLA identifies several types of entrepreneurs and business operators—both individuals and entities—as “potentially liable parties” (PLPs) who may be held liable under the law. In the EV context, this could include vehicle manufacturers, battery suppliers, software developers whose systems are integrated into the vehicle, and local importers or distributors. Specifically, the PLA covers: Manufacturers or hirers Importers Sellers of goods for which the manufacturer, hirer, or importer cannot be identified Any other party who uses the name, trade name, trademark, or statements associated with the alleged unsafe products, or acts in a manner that causes them to be perceived as a manufacturer, hirer, or importer Definition of “Product” and “Unsafe Product” The

January 6, 2026

Thailand Issues High-Risk Product List for Digital Marketplaces

On December 30, 2025, Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) notified digital marketplace operators of a consolidated list of “high‑risk products” that are subject to strict monitoring on digital platforms. The list was jointly prepared by the Thai Industrial Standards Institute (TISI) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to guide platform compliance in the initial phase of implementation of the Electronic Transaction Committee’s Notification on Other Measures for Marketplace for Goods with Specific Characteristics under Section 18(2) of the 2022 Royal Decree on Digital Platform Businesses Requiring Notification B.E.2568 (2025). The notice is addressed to operators of digital platform services that function as product marketplaces with specific characteristics laid out in the notification. The ETDA states that the TISI and the FDA are closely monitoring the high‑risk product categories on digital platforms, and the published list serves as the baseline reference for platform screening during the initial phase of the notification’s implementation. High‑Risk Product List The list aggregates categories of products that are illegal to sell online or are otherwise tightly regulated under Thai law, with an emphasis on health-related products, controlled substances, medical devices, and a wide range of industrial products that require certification or compliance with specified Thai Industrial Standards, as detailed below. Prohibited and tightly controlled health products. This includes all categories of modern medicines subject to control other than general household remedies; all categories of controlled herbal products except for over-the-counter herbal products; narcotics; psychotropic substances; and medical devices requiring use in medical facilities or a physician’s prescription. Selected industrial products requiring heightened controls. The list highlights dozens of TISI-regulated items commonly sold online. Examples include pacifiers, rice cookers, electrical wire, food wrap film, crayons, washing machines and dryers, air conditioners, electric cookers and air fryers, water heaters, microwave ovens, LED luminaires, hair dryers

Industries

Practices

February 27, 2018