In today’s world of fast-moving consumer goods and services, disputes between consumers and business operators are commonplace. Consumer protection and product liability laws—which increase access to the courts, streamline the adjudication of claims, and increase damage recovery options for injured consumers—drive more and more disputes into the Thai courts. Historically, plaintiffs were limited to recovering only actual damages, which seek to compensate victims for loss or harm. With the passage of the Product Liability Act B.E. 2551 (2008) and the Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E.

A key cause of labor unrest in Thailand occurs when employers try to implement changes in the workplace unilaterally, without realizing that their actions result in unlawful changes to legally protected conditions of employment.  This article discusses the process and the pitfalls of changing conditions of employment.

The original concept of copyright law is to protect the author from the unauthorized exploitation of his or her original work. To this end, the public at large may not be able to have access to or exploit useful information protected by copyright. To strike a compromise between the rights of the author and the needs of the public, the doctrine of fair use has been gradually developed. This article discusses the fair use doctrine and its application in Thailand.

According to official doctrine, land in Vietnam belongs to the people, while the use of such land is administered on the people’s behalf by the State. Thus, “land ownership” is more appropriately referred to as a “land use right” (LUR). The State administers the LUR by issuing a Land Use Right Certificate (LURC), similar to a title deed to real property in the West. LURCs designate, among other things, the duration and purpose of the land use. Any use of the land beyond the scope of the LUR can lead to a withdrawal of the LUR by the State.

In 2010, the Vietnamese government took a number of bold actions against intellectual property right (IPR) violations including a historic court ruling, a decree strengthening remedies for certain violations, and a decree establishing increased fines for acts of piracy.

Thai courts have yet to determine whether “trade dress,” or the look and feel of a product’s packaging or presentation, should be legally protected under the Thai Trademark Act of 1991. In fact, despite its importance for consumers, the subject rarely arises. This stands in contrast to the ongoing legal debate surrounding conventional trademark issues, such as trademark similarity or the registrability of three-dimensional trademarks, sounds, or smells. To understand the complexity of the trade dress issue, this article examines the concept from an intellectual property standpoint.

A recent movement in Thai society has led to the introduction of the Patient Injury Bill, which has become popularly known as the “Medical Malpractice Bill” (the Bill). The purpose of the Bill is to set up a compensation fund for patients suffering from healthcare injuries. Under the Bill, compensation should be timely paid to patients regardless of whether a fault was committed by the medical care provider, known as a “sanatorium.” By providing a remedy to injured patients, the Bill aims to decrease the number of court cases regarding medical malpractice.

Thailand’s intellectual property system offers a variety of robust forms of protection for IP owners. But this was not always the case. Just 15 years ago, IP owners in Thailand had many fewer options available to them in defending their rights. In order to understand Thailand’s IP system today, it is worthwhile to reflect on how these new forms of protection came into being. This article provides an overview.