ICLG: Shipping Law 2026 – Thailand

1 Marine Casualty

1.1 In the event of a collision, grounding or other major casualty, what are the key provisions that will impact upon the liability and response of interested parties? In particular, the relevant law / conventions in force in relation to:

1. Collision
   
   Thailand is not a party to the Collision Convention 1910. Liability for collision is fault-based and is governed prin cipally by the Act on Civil Liability and Compensation for Damage Arising from Ship Collision B.E. 2548 (2005), supplemented by sections 303–305 of the Navigation in Thai Waters Act B.E. 2456 (1913) and the general tort provi sions (sections 420–425) of the Civil and Commercial Code (“CCC”). Where one vessel is at fault, that vessel bears the loss; where both vessels are at fault, liability is apportioned in proportion to the degree of fault of each vessel, and where the respective degrees of fault cannot be established, liability is borne equally. Vessels at fault are jointly liable for death and personal injury, with rights of recourse between them (exercisable within one year of payment). The collision avoidance rules are contained in the Act on Prevention of Ship Collision B.E. 2522 (1979), which gives effect to the COLREGs 1972.
   
   
2. Pollution
   
   Thailand is a party to MARPOL 73/78 (Annexes I and II), the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC) 1992, the Fund Convention 1992 and the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation 1990. The CLC and Fund Convention regimes are implemented domes tically by the Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage Caused by Ships Act B.E. 2560 (2017), which imposes strict (but limitable) liability on the registered owner of a ship carrying persistent oil, requires compulsory insur ance for ships carrying more than 2,000 tonnes of oil in bulk, and permits direct action against the insurer, and by the Act on Contributions to the International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage B.E. 2560 (2017). More generally, the Navigation in Thai Waters Act B.E. 2456 (1913) prohibits the discharge of oil and pollutants into Thai waters and empowers the Harbour Master to order clean-up and recover the costs from the wrongdoer, while section 96 of the Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental Quality Act B.E. 2535 (1992) imposes strict liability for pollution damage on the owner or possessor of the pollution source.
   
   
3. Salvage / general average
   
   Thailand has not ratified the Salvage Convention 1989, but the Marine Salvage Act B.E. 2550 (2007) closely follows it. The Act adopts the “no cure, no pay” prin ciple, sets reward criteria mirroring Article 13 of the Convention, provides special compensation for salvors who prevent or minimise environmental damage, obliges the persons liable to provide security before the salved property is released, and imposes a two-year time bar running from the date on which the salvage opera tions were completed. General average is governed by the General Average Act B.E. 2547 (2004), which codi fies principles consistent with the York-Antwerp Rules (which are, in any event, commonly incorporated by contract). Claims for general average contribution are subject to a one-year prescription period from notifi cation of the adjustment, with long-stop periods of five years (where the shipowner claims) and seven years (where the party sustaining the loss claims) from the date the general average act occurred.
   
   
4. Wreck removal
   
   Thailand is not a party to the Nairobi Wreck Removal Convention 2007. Wreck removal is dealt with under the Navigation in Thai Waters Act B.E. 2456 (1913), under which the owner of a vessel sunk or stranded so as to obstruct navigation must mark the wreck and remove it within the period fixed by the Harbour Master. If the owner fails to do so, the Marine Department may remove or destroy the wreck at the owner’s expense and may sell the wreck and cargo to recover its costs, with the owner remaining liable for any shortfall.
   
   
5. Limitation of liability
   
   Thailand is not a party to the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1976 or its 1996 Protocol, and there is no global tonnage-based limitation regime. A shipowner’s liability is therefore, in principle, unlim ited under the CCC. Limitation exists only under spe cific statutory regimes: the package/weight limitation under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act B.E. 2534 (1991) (“COGSA”) of THB 10,000 per shipping unit or THB 30 per kilogram of the net weight of the goods, whichever is higher; and the CLC-based limits for tanker oil pollution under the Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage Caused by Ships Act B.E. 2560 (2017).
   
   
6. The limitation fund
   
   There is no general limitation fund procedure in Thailand. The only fund mechanism is the one available under the Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage Caused by Ships Act B.E. 2560 (2017), which permits the shipowner to constitute a fund with the court (by deposit or acceptable guarantee) in accordance with CLC principles in order to limit liability, with the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund providing second-tier compensation.
   

1.2 Which authority investigates maritime casualties in your jurisdiction?

Maritime casualties are investigated by the Marine Department of the Ministry of Transport, acting through the Harbour Master and casualty investigation panels. The Royal Thai Navy and the Marine Department have parallel roles in maritime security and enforcement matters, and the police and public prosecutors handle any criminal aspects of a casualty.

1.3 What are the authorities’ powers of investigation / casualty response in the event of a collision, grounding or other major casualty?

Under the Navigation in Thai Waters Act B.E. 2456 (1913), the Harbour Master may board and inspect vessels, summon and examine the master and crew, require production of ships’ documents (log books, charts and records), detain a vessel pending investigation or pending the provision of security for damage caused, suspend or revoke the certificates of masters and pilots found at fault, order the removal of wrecks and navi gational hazards, and impose administrative fines. In pollu tion incidents, the authorities may order or undertake clean-up measures and recover the costs. Detained vessels are, in prac tice, released against security acceptable to the authorities, and criminal referrals may be made where offences are disclosed.

2 Cargo Claims

2.1 What are the international conventions and national laws relevant to marine cargo claims?

Thailand is not a party to the Hague, Hague-Visby, Hamburg or Rotterdam Rules. Marine cargo claims on international carriage are governed by COGSA, a sui generis statute drawing on both the Hague-Visby and Hamburg Rules. COGSA applies to carriage of goods by sea from or to a port in Thailand (and where the parties agree to its application), other than purely domestic carriage, to which the carriage provisions of the CCC apply. Multimodal carriage including a sea leg is governed by the Multimodal Transport Act B.E. 2548 (2005).

2.2 What are the key principles applicable to cargo claims brought against the carrier?

Under COGSA, the carrier must exercise due diligence before and at the commencement of the voyage to make the ship seaworthy, properly manned, equipped and supplied, and must properly and carefully load, handle, stow, keep, care for and discharge the goods. The carrier is liable for loss of, damage to or delay in delivery of the goods occurring while the goods are in its charge, unless it proves one of the statu tory exceptions (including force majeure, perils of the sea, war, strikes, fire occurring without its fault, inherent vice, insuffi ciency of packing, and act or fault of the shipper). Liability is limited to THB 10,000 per shipping unit or THB 30 per kilo gram of net weight, whichever is higher; the limit is displaced where the nature and value of the goods were declared and inserted in the bill of lading, and is lost where the loss results from the carrier’s act or omission done with intent to cause the loss or recklessly and with knowledge that loss would prob ably result. The carrier’s servants and agents enjoy the same defences and limits. The consignee should give written notice of loss or damage upon delivery (or, for non-apparent loss, within the statutory notice period) to preserve its evidentiary position, although failure to do so does not bar the claim.

2.3 In what circumstances may the carrier establish claims against the shipper relating to misdeclaration of cargo?

The shipper is deemed to guarantee to the carrier the accu racy of the particulars it furnishes for the bill of lading (marks, number, quantity and weight) and must indemnify the carrier against loss resulting from inaccuracies. For dangerous goods, the shipper must inform the carrier of the dangerous character of the goods and mark them appropriately; where it fails to do so, the shipper is liable for all resulting loss and expenses, and the carrier may land, destroy or render the goods innocuous without compensation. The carrier’s claims against the shipper fall into three categories: (a) a strict, guarantee-based indem nity for inaccurate bill-of-lading particulars under sections 23 and 32, which survives the transfer of the bill; (b) full liability for losses resulting from undeclared or unmarked dangerous goods under sections 33–34, together with the carrier’s right to dispose of such goods without compensation; and (c) liability for other fault-based losses under section 31, arising from the negligence of the shipper or its agents or from noncompliance with applicable laws or customs concerning the nature of the goods. Fraudulent misdeclaration may additionally ground claims in tort and criminal liability.

2.4 How do time limits operate in relation to maritime cargo claims in your jurisdiction?

Claims against the carrier for loss, damage or delay under COGSA must be brought by court action or arbitration within one year from the date of delivery of the goods or, where there was no delivery, from the date on which the goods should have been delivered (section 46). The period may be extended before its expiry by a written declaration of the party against whom the claim is made (section 47). Claims in tort are subject to a one-year prescription from the date the injured party knew of the wrong and the identity of the wrongdoer, with a 10-year long-stop. Claims under the Multimodal Transport Act B.E. 2548 (2005) are subject to a nine-month time bar.

3 Passenger Claims

3.1 What are the key provisions applicable to the resolution of maritime passenger claims?

There is no maritime-specific passenger liability statute. Passenger claims are resolved under the CCC provisions on carriage of passengers, under which the carrier is liable for injury to the passenger and for delay unless caused by force majeure or the fault of the passenger, together with the general tort provisions. Passenger vessel safety, licensing and manning are regulated under the Navigation in Thai Waters Act B.E. 2456 (1913). Claims by fare-paying passengers may also be pursued under the claimant-friendly procedure of the Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551 (2008).

To read this article in full, please click here.