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 3, 2022

Unsafe Products: Liability under Thailand’s Product Liability Law

Bangkok Post

Impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic have led some manufacturers to reduce costs by changing production methods, designs, or machinery, or reducing the number of employees on payroll. While these strategies may reduce costs and help their business survive, they may also result to lower quality goods. In the worst case, however, these poor quality goods may cancel out or even outweigh a manufacturer’s cost savings if the products are deemed to be unsafe for consumers under Thailand’s Product Liability Act (officially the Liability for Damages Arising from Unsafe Products Act).

The Product Liability Act has been in force for 14 years. However, there have been few landmark Supreme Court decisions related to it as most cases are settled before the final judgment. Consequently, most business owners have limited knowledge of the precedent cases and are unsure about what actions they can take to manage and mitigate the risk of being found liable for claims of damages due to an unsafe product.

The Product Liability Act identifies several types of entrepreneurs and business operators (individuals and entities) as “potentially liable parties” (PLPs) who may be penalized under the law:

  • 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 of the alleged unsafe products, or acts in a manner that causes them to be seen as a manufacturer, hirer, or importer

The Product Liability Act defines a “product” as any kind of movable property that has been manufactured or imported for sale—including agricultural products and electricity, but excluding those ruled out by ministerial regulations. Therefore, real estate and services are excluded from the Product Liability Act. However, real estate buyers are protected by the Civil and Commercial Code, and by the Consumer Protection Act as well in some circumstances.

In addition, the Product Liability Act defines an “unsafe product” as any product that causes or may cause damage or injury due to a manufacturing defect, design defect, or lack of clear warning, instructions, or other information about usage, maintenance, or preservation of the product. If an unsafe product causes damage or injury to the consumer who purchased it, regardless of whether the damage was caused intentionally or negligently, every PLP will be jointly liable for the damages sustained by the consumer, with few exceptions.

Under the Product Liability Act, aggrieved parties only need to prove that they suffered damage or injury from the PLP’s product, and that they had used and maintained the product properly. The aggrieved party does not need to prove which PLP caused the damage or injury.

In addition, PLPs cannot avoid liability by entering into an agreement with the consumer that is meant to waive or limit PLPs’ liability in advance.

However, PLPs facing claims under the Product Liability Act can avoid liability if they can prove one of the following:

  • The product was not unsafe.
  • The plaintiff was aware that the product was unsafe.
  • The plaintiff misused the product, despite clear information and warnings.

The Product Liability Act provides two different methods through which an aggrieved party can bring a claim—either by filing a lawsuit in any court that has jurisdiction or by filing a complaint with the Consumer Protection Board. Alternatively, a foundation or association authorized by the Consumer Protection Board file the complaint on behalf of the aggrieved consumer or party. If the foundation or association submits the complaint to the relevant court, the court fees are waived but fees ordered by the court in its final judgment are still payable.

In cases where the court determines that the aggrieved party was damaged by an unsafe product, the court will award damages. The damages are not restricted to those set out in the Civil and Commercial Code, but may include other forms of compensation that are unusual under Thai law, at the court’s discretion.

For example, the court may award damages for mental pain and suffering, as well as actual bodily harm and harm to property. If the unsafe product caused a person’s death, the court may award damages for the mental pain and suffering of the immediate family. If the PLP was aware (or should have been aware) that the product was unsafe not due to gross negligence, the court may award punitive damages of up to twice the actual damages.

The Consumer Protection Board is entitled under the Consumer Protection Act to order business operators to recall, destroy, or cease selling any unsafe product if the business operator fails to comply with that law’s requirements.

In summary, the Product Liability Act functions to protect consumers from unsafe products by simplifying the procedure and reducing the burdens for consumers to bring an action. In addition, the law states the scope of liability for entities involved in the manufacture, sale, and importation of products, while leaving few avenues for PLPs to avoid liability. Therefore, these PLPs need to be aware of the liabilities before providing a product to consumers.

 

This article was originally published in the Bangkok Post.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 30, 2022
In keeping with the government’s strong focus on consumer protection in recent years, Cambodia’s consumer protection authority issued a notice on consumer product labeling on September 23, 2022. The notice from the General Department of Consumer Protection, Competition, and Fraud Repression (CCF) provides clarifications on labeling rules for general consumer products, goods, and services. The most significant clarification is that both locally produced and imported products, goods, and services must have a Khmer-language label or attach a product description in Khmer language. Imports may use a sticker with Khmer language as long as the minimum labeling requirements are met. The notice announces a transition period for companies to amend their labeling, allowing them to make changes to the labeling until December 31, 2022. According to the notice, the CCF will investigate and take enforcement measures starting January 1, 2023. This likely signals a major increase in enforcement efforts throughout 2023. Labeling Rules The CCF notice gives instructions on product labeling rules. In Cambodia, “product” refers to general products, goods, and services on the Cambodian market. Product-specific labeling regulations (e.g., for food products) overrule the requirements for these general products. The CCF notice provides the following instructions: All products on the market must have a label, or attach a product description, using Khmer language. Imported products that do not have a Khmer-language label printed on the packaging should provide a product description in Khmer. Companies can attach the necessary information or apply a sticker to the product. Trademarks on the products may use a foreign language but must be in line with the relevant local trademark registration. Foreign-language or different labeling is only permitted if authorized by the regulator, or by regulations that apply to a specific type of product. The label or product description must use an appropriate font
September 15, 2022
In the course of our work, we often hear about consumers in Thailand lodging complaints with the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) about problems with a purchased product or service. The OCPB is a government agency attached to the Office of the Prime Minister. Its main duties are to protect consumers in Thailand with respect to product advertising, product labeling, and contracts, and to handle consumer complaints. However, there are exceptions to the types of consumer complaints that the OCPB can handle. This is because some consumer complaints must by law be handled by certain specialized agencies. Examples of these exceptions include consumer complaints relating to: health products (food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, household dangerous substances, and narcotics); medical services; insurance; pricing of consumer products; condominium juristic person; public land; rail, water, and air transportation; tourism; education; banking and finance; telecommunications; and electricity and water consumption. Procedure When a consumer complaint that the office can accept comes to the OCPB, the officers first consider whether the business operator has violated any laws, in which case the relevant authorities, such as the police, should handle the matter. When the officers consider it appropriate, they may ask the parties to mediate the dispute. Complaints in Bangkok are mediated by officers at the Bangkok OCPB. For complaints lodged in other provinces, the governors of the provinces may assign officers or agencies under their supervision to mediate. The OCPB can mediate twice within 90 days. If the parties still want to continue with the mediation, a subcommittee of the Consumer Protection Board (CPB)—the body that directs the OCPB—will then conduct two more mediation sessions within 90 days. If a resolution is still not reached, the subcommittee can conduct one additional mediation session before declaring the mediation failed and ending the complaint
January 12, 2022
The popularity of the franchise business model has grown rapidly in mainland 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, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam. Although these countries have not yet enacted franchising-specific laws, certain features of each country’s regulatory regime impact franchising. As such, well-prepared franchise business operations have comfortably adapted 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 pandemic. In fact, the franchise business model, which is both global and local at the same time, may offer retail entrepreneurs a solution in their quest to meet the challenges of the new retail economic realities. This article explains the legal frameworks that impact the franchise business model in Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam. For each country, this article discusses relevant regulatory considerations for franchise agreements, how to protect intellectual property rights, and judicial and arbitral procedures for resolving disputes that might arise between a franchisor and a franchisee. The full article can be downloaded through the button below.   © 2021. Originally published in the Franchise Law Journal, Vol. 41, No. 2, Fall 2021, by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association or the copyright holder.
December 31, 2021
In the last week of December, 2021, the Ministry of Justice published the Law Amending Certain Provisions of the Laws on Tax No. 01/NA, dated August 7, 2021, in the Government Gazette. The Law will come into force on January 1, 2022. The most notable amendments relate to Value Added Tax (VAT), which are summarized below. The new law also makes changes to the laws on tax management, income tax, and excise tax, which Tilleke & Gibbins will provide updates on in due course.