Getting the Deal Through – Arbitration 2017, Thailand Chapter

March 23, 2017

Getting the Deal Through – Arbitration 2017, Thailand Chapter

Law Business Research

Getting the Deal Through – Arbitration 2017, published by Law Business Research, provides an in-depth insight into arbitration law in more than 50 jurisdictions worldwide. Kornkieat Chunhakasikarn, attorney-at-law, and John Frangos, consultant, in Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution group, coauthored the Thailand chapter of the guide, which covers the following topics:

Laws: The New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1960, the Geneva Convention on the Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1927, agreements supporting the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, the Convention Establishing the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency 1985, the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes Convention 1965, the Arbitration Act 2002, and the UNCITRAL Model Law.
Institutions: The Thai Arbitration Institute of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Office, the Office of the Arbitration Tribunal of the Board of Trade of Thailand, and the Thailand Arbitration Center.
Arbitration agreements: Arbitrability, requirements, enforceability, third parties bound by arbitration agreements, groups of companies, and multiparty arbitration agreements.
Constitution and jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals: Eligibility of arbitrators, default appointment of arbitrators, challenge and replacement of arbitrators, relationship between parties and arbitrators, immunity of arbitrators from liability, court proceedings contrary to arbitration agreements, and jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal.
Arbitral proceedings: Place and language of arbitration, commencement of arbitration, hearings, evidence, court involvement, and confidentiality.
Interim measures and sanctioning powers: Interim measures by courts, emergency arbitrators, and arbitral tribunal, and sanctioning powers of the arbitral tribunal.
Awards: Arbitral tribunal decisions, dissenting opinions, form and content requirements, time limits, date of awards, types of awards, termination of proceedings, cost allocation and recovery, and interest.
Proceedings subsequent to awards issuance: Interpretation and correction, challenge, levels of appeal, recognition and enforcement, and cost of enforcement.
Other: Judicial system influence, professional or ethical rules applicable to counsel, third-party funding, and regulation of activities.

Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in Getting the Deal Through: Arbitration 2017 (published in March 2017; contributing editors: Gerhard Wegen and Stephan Wilske, Gleiss Lutz). For further information please visit https://gettingthedealthrough.com/area/3/arbitration-2017.

Download Full Article

Related Professionals

Kornkieat Chunhakasikarn

Attorney-at-Law

Thailand

+66 2056 5555

Email

John Frangos

Partner and Director, Dispute Resolution

Thailand

+66 2056 5790

Email

RELATED INSIGHTS

April 23, 2024

Civil Litigation in Thailand

Litigation is usually the last resort in resolving disputes. Most parties to a dispute try to avoid litigation altogether, fearing that seeking recourse with the courts or arbitration will lead to a disruption in commercial relationships, result in increased legal expenses, and generally lengthen the period in which the dispute remains unresolved. While some of these concerns may indeed be legitimate, sometimes litigation is the only means for a party to obtain relief. For parties contemplating such recourse, it is reassuring to know that the Thai court system is generally an accessible, unbiased, and balanced vehicle for the resolution of disputes. Civil Litigation in Thailand aims to introduce some of the fundamentals of Thai civil court procedures and practices. This brief guide covers the main issues concerning civil litigation in Thailand as either a plaintiff or a defendant. The full guide is available through the button below.

April 18, 2024

In-Court Arbitration in Thailand: A Tool Worth Exploring?

In-court arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) tool provided in the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) for cases that have already been submitted to the court. Historically, in-court arbitration has not been a popular method of resolving disputes. Instead, out-of-court arbitration, as prescribed by the Thai Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002), is far more utilized in practice. The popularity of out-of-court arbitration is demonstrated by the fact that presentations on arbitration in Thailand almost exclusively focus on out-of-court arbitration; in-court arbitration is rarely even a topic of discussion. This situation is partly because in-court arbitration has not been encouraged by the courts in the past. Further, it is also not common for parties to agree on arbitration clauses after a dispute arises and also after it has been submitted to the court. Instead, arbitration clauses are generally discussed and crafted during the negotiation of the contract, which will most likely provide that any dispute arising out of the contract is to be resolved by out-of-court arbitration. Nonetheless, the Thai Courts of Justice have recently started to support this in-court ADR tool as a viable option and to encourage parties to agree in-court arbitration clauses before proceeding with a case through trial. This article is not meant to assess whether in-court arbitration is preferable to either out-of-court arbitration or to having the case heard by professional judges of the Courts of Justice. Instead, the purpose of this article is to discuss certain key provisions of the CPC that parties should carefully consider before agreeing to an in-court arbitration clause. On this point, the CPC specifically states that out-of-court arbitration is prescribed by arbitration law, the Arbitration Act, which is an entirely separate piece of legislation drafted specifically to apply to out-of-court arbitration. In contrast, in-court arbitration is completely regulated by

April 17, 2024

Navigating Document Formality Challenges in Vietnam

Intellectual property rights holders pursuing legal actions in Vietnam have faced various challenges related to document formality in recent years. For example, in two different disputes at the Ho Chi Minh City Court, we have seen the judge request the claimants to re-prepare the civil dossier due to a lack of documentation proving the authorization of the signer—despite the fact that the cases had been ongoing for long time. Meanwhile, many domain names have been unable to be registered and transferred in recent months. Third-party representatives cannot handle the work as they normally would, as Vietnam’s domain name authority has required all documents to be signed by the domain name holders themselves, instead of the law firms representing them. Such demands have created unnecessary complexities and obstacles for IP holders seeking to protect their rights in Vietnam. Legal Formalities in the Court System Vietnam’s judicial landscape presents unique hurdles for IP holders to enforce their rights. One significant challenge is the requirement for the claimant’s legal representative (typically the CEO/president), as explicitly displayed on the company’s business license, to sign all documents related to a lawsuit. This requirement clashes with the operational practices of many foreign companies, where multiple individuals may have the authority to represent the company. It is extremely impractical, especially in a large multinational conglomerate, for the CEO/president to personally execute all documents and transactions. Instead, authorized staff within these organizations, such as department heads or general counsel, typically handle these tasks. In this situation, Vietnamese courts often demand additional documentation to prove the officers’ authority, necessitating specific authorization documents that may not always be readily available. The courts sometimes remain unconvinced by declarations from the CEO/president affirming the authorization of these officers, and despite such assurances, they may still demand tangible proof of authorization, adding

April 11, 2024

Litigation Funding in Thailand

Costly and time-consuming litigation can cause entrepreneurs to lose a lot of money, leading to cash flow problems and even threatening their ability to continue their business operations. One alternative to these financial challenges is litigation funding. This can be an option for people intending to file a lawsuit or those being sued to address potential financial liquidity problems caused by the financial demands of litigation. Litigation funding refers to financial support provided by an unrelated third party with no interest in the dispute who agrees to fund the costs a party incurs during the dispute resolution process in exchange for a portion of any money potentially awarded to the party being funded. If the funded party loses the case, the third party (i.e., the funder) is solely responsible for the costs. Although litigation funding is available in various countries, Thailand considers it to be contrary to public order and good morals, which renders litigation funding agreements void and unenforceable. Recognition and Enforcement in Thailand There are no laws or regulations in Thailand that specifically mention litigation funding. However, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that litigation funding is not recognized and is not legally enforceable under Thai law. These Supreme Court precedents have established that agreements to receive benefits in return for pursuing litigation in which the funding party is not involved would be an act of seeking benefit from the litigation of others. As noted above, this purpose has been viewed as contrary to public order and good morals, which results in the agreement being void and unenforceable by other Thai courts (Supreme Court Judgment No. 7014/1999). Therefore, if a litigation funding agreement were in place in a Thai dispute and the funded party won, the funding party would most likely not be legally entitled to any

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

Industries

Practices

March 23, 2017