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

Biography

Alongkorn Tongmee is an experienced litigator in Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution department. He handles complex commercial disputes related to contract breaches, insurance matters, transportation, bankruptcy and business reorganization, construction, international arbitration, and international asset recovery matters.

As a member of the firm’s compliance and investigations practice, Alongkorn also assists clients on white-collar crime and cybercrime matters, anticorruption, internal and government investigations, and extradition matters. Alongkorn has extensive experience dealing with the Royal Thai Police (including immigration officials), public prosecutors, and Thailand’s various regulatory agencies.

Alongkorn is a well-rounded attorney, having previously practiced with the firm’s corporate and commercial team. With this experience, he brings strong knowledge of corporate matters which he utilizes in his disputes practice. He has also undergone Tilleke & Gibbins’ innovative constitutional and administrative law training program led by esteemed academics, former judges, and other accomplished legal practitioners in Thailand.

Alongkorn has completed the Barrister-at-Law requirements of the Institute of Legal Education, Thai Bar Association. He acts as a guest law lecturer at Dhonburi Rajabhat University. He frequently gives presentations on topics related to construction, labor law, anticorruption, and white-collar crime.

Experience

  • Represented a leading global technology company in a wrongful act dispute related to a high-value construction project.
  • Provided advice and assistance regarding various legal issues to a multinational financial services company that specializes in payment cards.
  • Acting for the owner of a landmark skyscraper project in a multi-million dollar arbitration arising out of a breached contract.
  • Representing a Thai conglomerate in environmental litigation arising out of a major telecommunications infrastructure project.
  • Representing a global EPC contractor in successful multinational arbitration relating to supply of engineering equipment for an offshore energy infrastructure project.
  • Acting for a client in a complex multi-jurisdictional dispute arising out of a default on the lease of an aircraft engine.
  • Advising a global logistics company and its insurer in multiple disputes arising out of a ship collision that caused damage to sensitive cargo.
  • Acting for one of Thailand’s largest telecommunications conglomerates in proceedings to revoke an unfavorable arbitration award through the Thai courts.
  • Successfully defending a securities agent against complex false allegations of fraudulent conduct related to an IPO.
  • Prosecuted and defended various complex civil and criminal actions related to breach of contract, wrongful acts, undue enrichment, fraud, and attempted fraud on behalf of our client.
  • Defended clients against criminal charges related to work permit issues, including providing legal advice, assisting clients at inquiry meetings with police officials, attending court hearings, and assisting with the immigration process.
  • Assisted a client and coordinated with Thai authorities and a foreign authority in an extradition matter related to a high-profile criminal fraud proceeding in a foreign country.
  • Assisted a client with business reorganization. Our representation included providing legal advice, preparing and submitting the debt repayment application, attending the creditors’ meeting, and attending court hearings.
  • Assisted government authorities with recovery of assets defrauded from Thailand to other countries.
  • Represented a client in a bankruptcy case. Our representation included providing legal advice, preparing and submitting a petition for an absolute receivership order and the debt repayment application, attending various meetings with the official receiver, and attending court hearings.
  • Helped a U.S. enterprise that successfully bid for a large IT project to commence and continue operations in Thailand, including securing long-term visas and work permits for a number of IT specialists of various nationalities and providing general legal counsel.
ABOUT Alongkorn

Location

Languages

    Thai

    English

Education

    LLM, Indiana University School of Law

    LLB, Thammasat University

Insights

August 24, 2026
Significant economic challenges facing Thailand in recent years have placed financial pressure on both individuals and businesses. As a result, many debtors may find themselves unable to meet their repayment obligations, leading to bankruptcy proceedings. When an individual or corporate debtor in Thailand is subject to bankruptcy proceedings, the Thai Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 (1940) provides a legal framework for collecting a debtor’s assets and using them to repay creditors. Under the Bankruptcy Act, creditors wishing to recover outstanding debts must file a debt repayment application (DRA), which is the primary mechanism for asserting claims in bankruptcy proceedings. However, the filing of a DRA is subject to specific legal requirements, procedural rules, deadlines, and supporting documentation. Failure to comply with these requirements may adversely affect a creditor’s ability to recover its claim. This article highlights the key considerations that creditors should be aware of when filing a DRA in a bankruptcy case in Thailand. Filing a DRA In a bankruptcy case, after the court issues an absolute receivership order, the debtor loses the authority to manage or dispose of its assets. Control over the debtor’s assets is transferred to the official receiver, a government official responsible for administering the bankruptcy estate in accordance with the Bankruptcy Act. Creditors seeking repayment of their debts must file a DRA with the official receiver within two months of the absolute receivership order being officially published in the Government Gazette. For creditors outside of Thailand, the official receiver may extend the filing period by up to an additional two months. These filing deadlines are strictly enforced. Failure to file within the prescribed period may result in the claim being barred, except in limited circumstances permitted by the Bankruptcy Act. Where a late filing is accepted due to force majeure, the creditor may only
August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.
August 18, 2026
Securing a favorable judgment is often only the midpoint of a dispute. For businesses and investors, the more important commercial question is whether that judgment can be converted into actual recovery. In Thailand, this typically requires the judgment creditor to enforce the judgment through the Legal Execution Department by seizing, attaching, auctioning, or otherwise executing against the judgment debtor’s assets. Thailand’s schedule of these enforcement fees was last revised by an amendment to the Civil Procedure Code that took effect in September 2025. The Civil Procedure Code Amendment Act (No. 33) B.E. 2568 (2025) updated the schedule of execution officer fees listed in table 5 of the Civil Procedure Code. While the amendment did not eliminate the costs associated with enforcement, it lowered several key execution officer fees and abolished certain fees that previously applied even where enforcement did not ultimately result in the sale or disposition of assets. The reform is intended to reduce the financial burden associated with judgment enforcement and remove unnecessary obstacles to settlement once enforcement proceedings have commenced. As a result, it has practical implications not only for judgment creditors seeking to maximize recovery, but also for debtors considering settlement after enforcement has begun and for businesses and investors assessing litigation and credit risk in Thailand. Key Changes The amendment introduced several changes to the execution officer fee structure. First, where seized or attached assets are sold by public auction or otherwise disposed of, the execution officer fee has been reduced from 3% to 2% of the sale or disposition proceeds. This fee remains separate from announcement costs and other out-of-pocket expenses incurred during the enforcement process. Second, where seized or attached funds are paid to a judgment creditor, the execution officer fee has been reduced from 2% to 1% of the amount recovered.
December 12, 2025
Cross-border disputes often end with a judgment or arbitral award issued outside Thailand. When a party has assets or operations in Thailand, the key question becomes simple: will a Thai court enforce it? Thai law treats foreign court judgments and foreign arbitral awards very differently. Foreign court judgments cannot be recognized or enforced directly and must effectively be re-litigated. Foreign arbitral awards, however, benefit from a clear recognition and enforcement process under the New York Convention and Thailand’s Arbitration Act. Thailand’s Overall Approach Thailand does not have a general law or treaty that allows automatic enforcement of foreign court judgments. To rely on a foreign judgment, a party must initiate a new lawsuit in a Thai court, plead the claim under Thai law, and prove the case again. The foreign judgment can be used as evidence, but it is not binding, and the Thai court retains full discretion to reassess both the facts and the law. Foreign arbitral awards are treated more favorably. Thailand is a longstanding member of the New York Convention and has implemented it through the Arbitration Act. The act provides a straightforward process for asking a Thai court to recognize and enforce a qualifying award, without retrying the dispute, and subject only to limited refusal grounds. Foreign Court Judgments: Persuasive but Not Binding Although Thai courts do not recognize or enforce foreign court judgments, they may rely on them as persuasive evidence under certain conditions. Courts generally give more weight to judgments that are final on the merits, issued by a court with proper jurisdiction, and reached after proper notice and an opportunity for the defendant to be heard. Default judgments or rulings based primarily on procedural grounds carry less weight, and the ultimate relevance and weight are left to the court’s discretion. In practical

Awards & Rankings

May 11, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins has continued to show excellent performance in the recently released Benchmark Litigation 2026 rankings for dispute resolution firms in the Asia-Pacific region. The rankings include two jurisdictions where Tilleke & Gibbins is active: Thailand and Vietnam. Firm Rankings A full summary of the firm’s rankings is provided below: Thailand Commercial & Transactions – Tier 1 Government & Regulatory – Tier 1 Labor & Employment – Tier 1 Intellectual Property – Tier 1 Trade & Customs – Tier 2 Vietnam Commercial & Transactions (Foreign Firms) – Tier 1 Intellectual Property (Foreign Firms) – Tier 1 Labor & Employment (International Firms) – Highly Recommended (top tier awarded in this category) White Collar Crime – Recommended (top tier awarded in this category) Energy & Construction (Foreign Firms) – Tier 2 International Arbitration – Tier 2 Individual Rankings The 2026 edition also recognizes 12 Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers in Thailand—more than any other firm in the jurisdiction—and four in Vietnam. Thailand Alongkorn Tongmee – Trade & Customs Chitchai Punsan – Commercial & Transactions Chusert Supasitthumrong – Labor & Employment John Frangos – Commercial & Transactions Noppramart Thammateeradaycho – Shipping Nuttaphol Arammuang – Intellectual Property Piyawat Vitooraporn – Commercial & Transactions Pongpalin Chantrapirom – Commercial & Transactions Suebsiri Taweepon – Intellectual Property Suruswadee Jaimsuwan – Commercial & Transactions Thawat Damsa-ard – Commercial & Transactions Tiziana Sucharitkul – Commercial & Transactions, Government & Regulatory Vietnam Duc Anh Tran – Commercial & Transactions Linh Duy Mai – Intellectual Property Loc Xuan Le – Intellectual Property Tu Anh Tran – Commercial & Transactions Benchmark Litigation’s annual research is based on interviews with dispute resolution specialists and clients, as well as analysis of recent casework and market developments. To view the full results, please visit the Benchmark Litigation websites for Thailand and Vietnam.

Other Professionals