Dispute Resolution in Thailand

Dispute Resolution in Thailand

In order to unclog Thai court dockets, many disputes are referred to arbitration. The arbitration process is suited to a wide variety of civil disputes.

Co-practice head Chandler MHM has a strong Thailand-based litigation and arbitration practice acting on a wide range of local disputes including construction, insurance claims, fraud and employment matters.


Arbitration is one of the most common methods for resolving disputes in Thailand. The prevailing view is that arbitration can be a faster and cheaper alternative to litigation than court proceedings.

The courts generally respect the choice of the parties regarding the governing law in an arbitration agreement and will enforce and interpret the award in accordance with that law. The courts will not, however, set aside an arbitration award unless it is found to be in violation of public order or morals or is contrary to the laws and regulations of the Kingdom of Thailand.

Arbitration in Thailand is generally conducted in a private setting, which means that all information, evidences and statements presented can be kept confidential. This can be beneficial for renowned individuals and businesses who wish to protect their reputation. The procedures of arbitration are also less formal than court proceedings, and the conciliation process is usually more flexible. This makes the arbitration process a good choice for those seeking a quick resolution to their dispute.


In Thailand, a dispute does not necessarily have to result in a court case. Rather, the opposing parties can settle their disputes by negotiation and, sometimes, mediation.

A reputable Thailand mediation firm can help you achieve a settlement agreement that avoids the risk of lengthy and costly court cases. Conciliation is a process that involves the mediator overseeing and facilitating communications between the disputing parties in order to reach a voluntary agreement.

Currently, the civil courts, Central Labour court, and the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court have conciliation services that are used with encouraging success rates. Additionally, in the context of arbitration proceedings, a judge has the discretion to facilitate a compromise between the disputing parties at any time during the course of the arbitration proceeding. Moreover, the arbitrator can even convene closed door sessions with the disputing parties to bring about a reconciliation.


Negotiation allows disputing parties to select a neutral third party that will make a ruling on their dispute. It can be less formal than a traditional court proceeding. Each party makes their case and answers questions from the arbitrator. The arbitration institute determines the timeframe for the proceedings and decides on evidence and procedural matters. A conciliation agreement will be made at the end of the process.

Commercial disputes in the aviation industry, banking and finance or IT sectors are often settled through negotiation. The timeframe for settling such cases through mediation is much quicker and cheaper than litigation. It also reduces the number of appeal cases. It also ensures that the negotiated settlement is enforceable and binding on both parties.

Expert Determination

In the construction and real estate sectors it is common for a dispute to arise from an omission or error in a contract, technical issues with the work being undertaken or unexpected site conditions. An expert determination can be a cost-efficient way of resolving such disputes before the case gets to court.

Expert determinations are usually subject to an underlying agreement between the disputing parties, setting out procedures and rules of expert valuation. This flexibility empowers the parties to the contract in deciding whom they want to appoint as their expert and allows for a more tailored approach to resolving the dispute.

The CPC provides that each party must file a list containing descriptions of witnesses, things and documents to be adduced as evidence in support of their allegations or contentions. However, the CPC does not provide for comprehensive discovery mechanisms during proceedings of a court of first instance, unlike in other jurisdictions.

Leave a Reply