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

June 23, 2020

Updated Deposit-on-Arrival Information and Pricing Policy for Foreign Travelers to Cambodia

Subscribe to Updates

On June 11, the Ministry of Health (MOH) released a notice on an updated pricing policy for COVID-19 tests, quarantine, and treatment services for foreign travelers arriving in Cambodia. This served to update and further detail an MOH announcement made on June 8 requiring that all foreign travelers entering Cambodia pay a deposit of USD 3,000 to designated commercial banks upon arrival at airports. This requirement was implemented on Monday, June 15, and is meant to ensure that all foreign travelers are able to pay for any required COVID-19 tests and other healthcare.

The June 8 announcement notes that the deposit can be made by cash or credit card, though initial reports indicate that payment methods are currently limited to cash and electronic funds transfer. Travelers who are unable to pay the deposit upon arrival could face immediate deportation. After the passage of the two-week quarantine or other relevant period, travelers may collect the remaining portion of their deposit that was not spent on necessary tests, quarantine facilities, transportation, and other services.

The June 11 notice outlined a payment structure for three potential subsets of travelers: those who quarantine upon arrival solely for the length of time necessary to obtain their negative COVID-19 test results, those who are forced to quarantine for 14 days due to being in proximity to a traveler on the same flight who tested positive for COVID-19, and those who test positive for COVID-19 upon arrival and must seek medical attention.

Fees for Foreigners Waiting for Initial COVID-19 Test Results

The pricing structure for services provided to foreign travelers includes transport from the airport to an isolation facility (USD 5), one COVID-19 test upon arrival and another within two weeks of arrival (USD 100 per test), lodging at designated hotels and quarantine centers (USD 30 per day), and three meals each day (USD 30 per day).

The designated hotels and quarantine centers, according to informal reports, include the Tian Yi International Hotel, Hotel Kolab Sor, and OK Boutique Hotel in Phnom Penh. Travelers do not have the option of choosing the hotel in which they would prefer to quarantine. Some hotels’ rates for meals and accommodations have been reported, and they differ slightly from the rates shared in the June 11 notice. According to unofficial reports, hotels are mandating double occupancy for each quarantine-designated room—even for solo travelers.

If all passengers test negative for COVID-19 upon arrival in Cambodia, their passports will be returned and they will be released from government custody. However, all are expected to self-isolate for the following two weeks. MOH self-isolation guidelines entail wearing a mask, refraining from leaving accommodations unless necessary, and physical distancing of approximately two meters. After 13 days in Cambodia, travelers should visit either the Khmer-Soviet Friendship Hospital in Phnom Penh or a provincial referral hospital for follow-up tests to confirm the absence of COVID-19.

The following official costs will be applicable to all foreign travelers arriving in Cambodia:

Fees for Government-Enforced Quarantine

If any traveler tests positive for COVID-19 upon arrival, all passengers on the same flight will be required to quarantine at designated government centers or hotels.

In the event of an enforced 14-day quarantine, the daily rates from the waiting period will continue and the following additional fees will be chargeable:

Therefore, including the room and board costs detailed earlier, for those travelers who test negative for COVID-19 upon arrival but who were on the same flight as someone who tested positive, a 14-day enforced quarantine at a designated facility is priced at approximately USD 84 per day.

Fees for COVID-19 Treatment in a Public Hospital

For those foreign travelers who test positive for COVID-19 upon arrival in Cambodia, a minimum of four COVID-19 tests (priced at USD 100 per test) must be administered, and each patient must pay USD 75 per day for lodging, food, and laundry services. The following associated fees may also apply:

The MOH has reiterated that, in addition to the USD 3,000 deposit, all foreign travelers to Cambodia are required to provide proof of health insurance providing coverage in Cambodia for up to USD 50,000, as well as an original and official medical certificate (signed and sealed with a stamp, certifying that the traveler is negative for COVID-19) issued within 72 hours of flying to Cambodia.

Travelers should also note that there has been confusion regarding the parameters of the 72-hour requirement. Some airlines have prevented travelers from boarding their flights to Cambodia because they would not arrive in Cambodia within 72 hours of their initial COVID-19 tests. The Cambodian embassy in Washington, DC, has indicated that it would defer to airlines’ judgment on interpreting the MOH requirements for travel. Travelers should therefore contact their airline for particulars on requirements.

Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 13, 2026
For decades, intellectual property rights holders seeking to eliminate counterfeit goods from the Thai market have relied primarily on criminal raid actions to seize infringing products and hold infringers accountable. The deterrent value of this approach is typically threefold: imposing criminal liability on infringers, removing counterfeit goods from circulation, and subjecting violators to imprisonment and fines. However, these outcomes often fall short of fulfilling brand owners’ broader objectives. In many cases, those prosecuted are merely staff or intermediaries rather than the principals orchestrating the infringing operations. Moreover, any fines imposed are remitted to the Thai government—not to the rights holders who have suffered commercial harm and invested substantial resources in investigation and coordination with law enforcement authorities. As in other jurisdictions worldwide, rights holders seeking monetary compensation for IP infringement in Thailand have traditionally pursued separate civil litigation. Before initiating such proceedings, a brand owner must gather sufficient evidence to establish both the infringement and the resulting damages. Notably, Thai law does not recognize punitive damages; courts award only actual damages proven by the claimant. In the absence of seized infringing goods, the damages awarded in such cases are typically minimal. This all leaves rights holders with limited recourse despite possibly having suffered significant commercial injury. In 2005, Thailand amended its Criminal Procedure Code to introduce Section 44/1, which enables rights holders to claim damages within criminal proceedings at the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court prior to the evidentiary hearing. In practice, this mechanism allows an injured party to submit a petition for civil damages directly within the criminal case initiated by the public prosecutor. Historically, rights holders in Thailand have been reluctant to use Section 44/1 because the compensation awarded by courts was often insufficient to justify the effort. However, recent years have seen a notable shift
Read More
March 9, 2026
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
Read More
March 5, 2026
Amid increasing financial globalization, Vietnam’s establishment of an International Financial Center (IFC) represents a strategic initiative to attract high-quality foreign investment and enhance the country’s position in the global financial system. In support of this objective, a Specialized Court was introduced under Resolution No. 222/2025/QH15 as a dedicated dispute resolution mechanism within the IFC framework. The Specialized Court at the IFC was subsequently operationalized by Law on the Specialized Court No. 150/2025/QH15, effective from January 1, 2026. Organizational Structure of the Specialized Court The Specialized Court at the IFC is a court within the system of the People’s Courts, organized and operating in accordance with the Law on the Specialized Court, and vested with jurisdiction to adjudicate and resolve cases at the IFC. The Specialized Court is located in Ho Chi Minh City and comprises (i) a Court of First Instance; (ii) a Court of Appeal, and (iii) a supporting apparatus. Jurisdiction of the Specialized Court The jurisdiction of the Specialized Court at the IFC is strictly defined based on both (i) the subject matter of the cases and (ii) the membership status of the parties involved. Specifically, the Specialized Court has jurisdiction over (except for cases involving public interests or the interests of the state) the following: Disputes arising from investment and business activities. Requests for recognition and enforcement in Vietnam of judgments and decisions of foreign courts and foreign arbitral awards. Requests related to dispute resolution by arbitration. Other disputes directly related to investment and business activities (to be specified by the Supreme People’s Court). Additionally, at least one party in the case must be a member of the IFC. The IFC’s membership status is established through registration, recognition as a member, or the grant of a license for establishment and operation within the IFC. In the
Read More
February 25, 2026
In December 2025, the National Assembly of Vietnam enacted a new Law on Construction, replacing the 2014 Law on Construction as amended in 2020. The 2025 Law on Construction will, in principle, take effect on July 1, 2026, subject to certain exceptions. Among its notable reforms, one development has attracted particular attention from both legal practitioners and market participants: the introduction of a statutory framework governing predetermined damages, commonly referred to as “liquidated damages.” This marks the first time liquidated damages have been expressly recognized at the level of primary legislation in Vietnam. While liquidated damages clauses have long been a common feature of construction contracts in practice, their legal enforceability has historically been subject to uncertainty. Although the new provision appears to represent a positive step toward greater legal clarity, it remains an open question whether it is sufficient, on its own, to provide a solid legal basis for the enforceability of liquidated damages clauses in construction disputes in Vietnam. What’s New? Article 86.2 of the 2025 Law on Construction provides (emphasis added): “Compensation for damages shall be determined on the basis of actual damages [or] predetermined damages corresponding to obligations under the construction contracts that are breached [and] the extent of such breaches.” This provision is significant in that it expressly recognizes predetermined damages, or liquidated damages, as a lawful basis for determining compensation for damage. However, the new law does not define “predetermined damages.” The absence of a statutory definition creates potential ambiguity as to the scope and nature of this concept and may give rise to disputes over how—and whether—a particular contractual clause qualifies as predetermined damages for the purposes of Article 86.2. Further, Article 86.2 qualifies the application of predetermined damages by requiring that such damages correspond to the obligations not fulfilled and the
Read More