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

December 19, 2022

Thailand’s Draft Liability for Defective Goods Act Advances in Legislative Process

Subscribe to Updates

On November 22, 2022, the Thai cabinet approved in principle the draft Liability for Defective Goods Act (the “Bill”) proposed by the Office of the Consumer Protection Board. While Thailand’s Product Liability Act B.E. 2551 (2008) deals with liability to consumers arising from unsafe products, the draft Liability for Defective Goods Act aims to ensure that consumers are well protected from defects in appliances and vehicles that might not initially be easily visible or noticed.

Key Definitions

The Bill applies most notably to business operators and consumers.

In the Bill, a “business operator” who may potentially be liable is:

  • a manufacturer (or its hirer) of goods for sale; or
  • a consignee or importer who brings goods into Thailand for sale; or
  • a seller or a hire purchase provider who cannot identify the manufacturer (or its hirer) or the importer.

As opposed to the Product Liability Act, which clearly provides that all business operators in the supply chain must be jointly liable, the Bill lacks such clear guidance. This could be interpreted as meaning that under the current Bill only the business operator at the top of the supply chain who is sued in the same case as other business operators is responsible.

A “consumer” is defined as a purchaser or hirer of goods from a manufacturer, including an assignee or successor of the goods from the purchaser or hirer.

Scope and Application

The Bill is intended to govern purchase or hire-purchase contracts for:

  • electric appliances;
  • electronic devices;
  • personal cars and motorcycles;
  • other goods that may be set out in a future royal decree issued under the act.

The Bill will not apply to any purchase or hire purchase of used products or as-is products when this is clearly stated by the seller or hire-purchase provider or the auctioneer in an auction.

A manufacturer will be liable for defects that existed at the time of delivery to the consumer and emerged within two years, regardless of whether the manufacturer was aware of them.

One particularly notable issue that has attracted objections from the business community is the section on burden of proof, which provides that if goods are found defective within one year of delivery, it will be presumed that the goods were defective at the time of delivery, and the business operator will be liable automatically. Therefore, the business operator has the burden to prove that the defect occurred after the delivery from the consumer’s use of the product.  This is a thorny topic that may ultimately prevent this Bill from moving forward.

A manufacturer is excluded from liability if (1) the consumer was aware of the defect at the time of purchase, (2) the defect was caused by the consumer modifying the goods without the manufacturer’s consent, or (3) the consumer did not maintain the goods in accordance with the user manual.

A business operator is also responsible for any defects related to installation or assembly of the goods if the business operator installs or assembles the goods, or if the consumer installs or assembles the goods according to incorrect information in a manual provided by the business operator.

In the event of defects that fall within the scope of the Bill, consumers will have the right:

  • to demand that the manufacturer repair or replace the goods;
  • to demand a discount on the product price (of the money already paid); or
  • to terminate the contract.

The consumer may exercise these rights without prejudice to their right to claim damages and costs incurred as appropriate. In addition, any contract provisions or terms that are contrary to the act, place the consumer at a disadvantage, or burden the consumer will be null and void.

The statutory prescription period under the Bill is two years from the consumer’s discovery of the defect, or from the business operator declining a request by the consumer for one of the methods above. Once the manufacturer agrees to repair or replace the goods, this period of time will be interrupted.

The Council of State is still collecting feedback from the public on the Bill for further review. It is expected to take some time moving through the legislative process before being enacted. For more information on the draft law, or on any aspect of consumer product liability, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Consumer Products

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 26, 2024
Indonesia enacted a new franchise regulation, Government Regulation No. 35 of 2024 on Franchising (“GR 35/2024”), on September 2, 2024. Franchising in Indonesia was previously governed by Government Regulation No. 42 of 2007 on Franchising (“GR 42/2007”), along with an implementing regulation, Ministry of Trade Regulation No. 71 of 2019 regarding Implementation of Franchising (“MOT Regulation 71/2019”). This new regulation repeals GR 42/2007. However, MOT Regulation No. 71/2019 remains in effect until a new MOT regulation can be enacted. The new franchise regulation contains several amendments and provides more detailed requirements to complement MOT Regulation No. 71/2019. Comparison of GR 35/2024 to GR 42/2007 Minimum years of business operation. The new regulation reduces the minimum duration that a franchise registration applicant must have been operating from five years to three years. Intellectual property (IP) status. Any relevant IP must now be registered before a franchise registration application can be submitted. This is a change from the previous regulations, under which it was possible to obtain a franchise registration (STPW) while an IP application was still pending, and if the IP application could not be registered, the STPW would be canceled. Registration requirements for foreign franchisors. Under the new regulation, foreign franchisors must provide a legalized or apostilled business permit document from the country of origin in addition to the previously required franchise offering prospectus and statement letter from the relevant Indonesian authority. Administrative sanctions. The new regulation has adjusted the three escalating stages of administrative sanctions to (1) two warning letters, (2) a 14-day suspension from business activities, and (3) STPW revocation. This varies from the three stages under the previous regulation (three warning letters, fine, and STPW revocation). The new regulation also expands the list of noncompliant actions that are subject to these administrative sanctions. In addition to
Read More
September 9, 2024
The popularity of the franchise business model has been growing rapidly in Southeast Asia in recent years, with some of the world’s top brands becoming common sights in the commercial districts and shopping malls of major regional cities in Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam. While for most countries in this part of the world, franchising has not been explicitly mentioned in legislation, well prepared franchise business operations can comfortably adapt to each country’s regulatory framework, and the growth is poised to continue even as the global retail sector redesigns and redoubles its efforts in the wake of the COVID-19 outbreak. In fact, the franchise business model, which is both global and hyper-local at once, is one of the most promising solutions that entrepreneurs are turning to in their quest to overcome the challenges of the new economic reality. The Regional Guide to Franchising Law in Southeast Asia provides key, up-to-date insights into the legal frameworks regulating franchise operations in these Southeast Asian countries, and helps brand owners understand the most relevant laws, authorities, and procedures for their business. Some of the essential topics covered for each jurisdiction include considerations in negotiating and designing franchise agreements, protecting intellectual property rights, and important information on judicial and arbitral procedures should a dispute arise between franchisor and franchisee. Practitioners from Tilleke & Gibbins’ offices in Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam contributed to guide—not only by providing legal expertise on the laws and mechanisms applicable in each jurisdiction, but also by examining strategies for establishing and running resilient franchise operations in Southeast Asia. The full guide can be accessed as a PDF through the button below.
Read More
July 9, 2024
On July 3, 2024, the Committee on Contracts of Thailand’s Consumer Protection Board announced the Notification re: Stipulation of Cash-on-Delivery (COD) Logistics Services as a Controlled-Receipt Business under the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979). The notification regulates businesses “providing goods transportation services that collect cash on delivery,” which refers to business operators responsible for transporting goods from sender (i.e., the merchant of the goods) to consumer (i.e., the purchaser of the goods) and upon delivery collects payment from the consumer either in cash or via bank transfer. The obligations that the notification imposes on these business operators are described below. Receipts Business operators must prepare a receipt as evidence of payment according to the specified requirements and deliver it to the consumer immediately upon receiving payment for the goods. The receipt must include text in Thai that is clearly visible and legible, with a font size of at least two millimeters and no more than 11 characters per inch. The text must contain essential information and conditions as specified in the notification, including: The duration that the business operator will hold the money received from the consumer before releasing it to the sender; The timeframe within which the consumer must notify the business operator to return the goods and request a refund; Information about the employees who deliver the goods and collect payment from consumers; The name of the person authorized to issue the receipt; Details about the parcel specifying the nature of the goods, including the name, type, kind, characteristics, size, weight, quantity, color, volume or capacity, and price of the goods; and A statement that the consumer has the right to reject the delivered goods or receive a refund. The receipt also must not contain any statement prohibited by the notification. Examples include: Text stipulating that
Read More
March 25, 2024
Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins in Vietnam have provided an updated Vietnam chapter for Fashion Law 2024, a guide to law surrounding the business of fashion in jurisdictions around the world. The guide, which covers 20 key jurisdictions in the global fashion industry, offers insights into local legal frameworks for a range of issues, such as brand enforcement and protection, e-commerce and marketing, and sustainability. The Vietnam chapter of Fashion Law 2024 provides detailed information on the following topics: Main intellectual property rights for fashion products Contractual arrangements in manufacturing, distribution, and advertising Regulations and enforcement of online marketing Unfair competition rules and judicial interpretation Specific regulations on sustainability and ESG in fashion Special import and export rules for fashion products The full Vietnam chapter is available for free through the button below and on the Global Legal Post website. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Thailand chapter to the guide.
Read More