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

November 12, 2025

Thailand to Remove Import Duty Exemption for Low-Value Goods

Thailand’s Customs Department has announced the cancellation of the longstanding de minimis exemption, which waives import duties on goods valued at THB 1,500 or less, as of January 1, 2026. This policy shift will directly impact e-commerce, logistics, and retail sectors, and will have wide-ranging implications for any company involved in cross-border trade with Thailand. Background Under current regulations, imported goods with a customs value (cost, insurance, and freight, or “CIF”) of THB 1,500 or less are exempt from import duties. This has been a cornerstone of the cross-border e-commerce model, allowing for the duty-free import of millions of small parcels. Under the new policy effective January 1, 2026, all imported goods, regardless of value, will be subject to assessment for import duties upon entry into Thailand. The stated rationale for this change is to create fair competition for Thai small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which must pay VAT and other costs on their goods, putting them at a price disadvantage against foreign sellers who utilize the de minimis loophole. Business Implications This policy change will create new costs, compliance burdens, and operational challenges. For foreign e-commerce sellers and platforms: The most direct impact will be the addition of import duties to low-value items. Assuming the costs are passed on to the consumer, the higher prices and potentially more complex or slower customs clearance processes could lead to increased cart abandonment and reduced consumer demand. Businesses should review their pricing models and develop a clear strategy for calculating, declaring, and paying these new duties. For logistics providers and customs brokers: The administrative burden will be considerable. Carriers that previously handled millions of nondutiable parcels will now be required to process them for duty assessment and collection. This may necessitate new IT systems and streamlined processes to avoid delays at

October 24, 2025

Franchise Agreements in Thailand: Nonrefundable Fees and Purchasing Conditions

Thailand currently lacks a specific franchise act. Consequently, the legality of any franchise agreement is determined by its compliance with various existing laws, such as the Civil and Commercial Code, the Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) (as amended), and the Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2530 (1997). Thailand is a freedom-to-contract jurisdiction. This allows for a high degree of flexibility and autonomy in contractual arrangements, provided that the terms do not violate any laws or public policy and do not fall under the scope of unfair contract terms. Given this, the requirement for fairness in franchise agreement terms often leads to uncertainty, but decisions from the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) can provide guidance on whether specific contentious terms are in fact fair. One issue worth examining in this light is the inclusion of terms on nonrefundable franchise fees and strict purchasing conditions. Franchise Fee: Unfair to Refuse Refund? Nonrefundable franchise fees represent a significant upfront investment for franchisees, often becoming a point of contention if the franchise relationship deteriorates or the franchisor ceases operations. Their fairness and enforceability are frequently scrutinized by regulatory bodies like the TCCT, highlighting the critical balance between contractual freedom and franchisee protection. Faced with one such case, the TCCT considered whether it was unfair for the franchisor to refuse to refund the franchise fee after the franchisor ceased operations. The franchisee had entered into a service agreement on August 2, 2021, and begun operating on October 9, 2021. However, by November 21, 2023, the franchisee was notified that the system would be shut down for maintenance, and by December 26, 2023, the franchisor announced the cessation of operations due to financial losses. The franchisee then requested a refund of the franchise fee. Unfortunately for the franchisee, the TCCT found that the franchisor’s

October 3, 2025

Thailand’s Beauty Industry Gets a Makeover with New Contract Standards

On September 26, 2025, the Contract Committee under Thailand’s Consumer Protection Board issued a regulation that aims to standardize contracts and enhance consumer protection within the beauty and wellness industry. The Notification on Prescribing the Beauty Service Business as a Contract-Controlled Business B.E. 2568 (2025), which takes effect on January 24, 2026, requires business operators to use a prescribed standard contract in Thai and adhere to strict mandatory provisions and prohibitions. These regulations apply to operators across all in-person and online service channels, including via digital platforms. “Beauty services business” is defined as the provision of services under an agreement allowing consumers to receive a series of treatments, either over a set number of sessions or within a set period. This includes massage, spa, other methods for cleanliness, beauty, or care of facial or body skin, and weight control and body shaping—including services offered electronically. The law excludes surgery, liposuction, and medical treatments performed by licensed practitioners. The notification establishes the following key requirements: Mandatory contract and formatting. All contracts with consumers must use the standard contract form, in Thai, with clear, readable text (minimum font size of 2 millimeters, no more than 11 characters per inch), and include all essential terms from the annexed form. Contract execution. Contracts must be made in duplicate, with one copy given to the consumer at signing. For agreements concluded through electronic channels, the process must comply with the Electronic Transactions Act and use the same required terms. Digital platforms. Business operators who provide services facilitated through a digital platform as an intermediary are ultimately responsible for ensuring the consumer receives a compliant contract. Prohibited clauses. The law prohibits clauses that limit or exclude liability for damages to life, body, health, mind, or property resulting from breach of contract or a wrongful act;

September 16, 2025

Thailand’s Updated Alcohol Law Balances Public Health and Tourism

Thailand has enacted amended alcohol control legislation that significantly tightens restrictions on marketing and advertising, strengthens enforcement, and creates mechanisms to support the country’s tourism objectives. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act (No. 2) B.E. 2568 (2025), published in the Government Gazette on September 9, 2025, will take effect on November 8, 2025. Key aspects of the new law are outlined below. Continuation of Sales-Hour Restrictions Sales-hour restrictions remain in effect, though now under an updated regulatory pathway. Alcohol sales are permitted only between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. and between 5:00 p.m. and midnight, with exceptions for airport terminals, entertainment venues under the Entertainment Place Act 1966, and hotels. Despite earlier discussions about relaxing these hours, no changes have been implemented under the new law. Enhanced Seller Responsibilities Sellers are now expressly permitted to check identification cards to verify purchaser age and may assess the condition of intoxicated customers. The assessment conditions will be announced in a forthcoming notification from the director of the Department of Disease Control. Sellers who willfully or negligently violate the law and cause damage to life, health, or property face possible penalties. Alcohol Vending Machines Permitted The law allows alcohol to be sold in vending machines that can verify buyer information and comply with rules, procedures, and conditions to be prescribed by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Committee. This means the industry must await the committee’s implementing regulations before deploying such machines. Expanded Marketing and Advertising Restrictions The amended law introduces a new suite of advertising restrictions, including more detailed and expansive definitions involving marketing and promotions. “Marketing communication” is broadly defined to include any direct or indirect act of publicizing, presenting, or disseminating information about alcoholic beverages through advertising, public relations, sales promotions, sponsorships, or any other means that may induce or encourage the

Industries

Practices

February 27, 2018