Educational Information Only — Not Legal Advice

    This site provides educational information only and is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified Thai lawyer for personalized guidance. Laws may change. Full DisclaimerPrivacy Policy

    Skip to main content
    Last reviewed: by Anglo Siam Law Editorial Team
    Share:

    Educational Information Only

    The content on this page is for general educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Every legal situation is unique. For matters involving investigation, arrest, litigation, or formal proceedings, consult a qualified legal professional.

    Back to Supreme Court Cases
    Commercial & Contract

    Product Liability Act — Strict Liability for Unsafe Products

    Injured Consumer v Producer / Importer / Seller

    Updated:
    Supreme Court
    Commercial & Contract
    B.E. 2559 (2016)

    Composite summary — not a single reported case. This entry distils a settled line of Thai Supreme Court (Dika / ฎีกา) authority for legal education. It is not a transcript of one reported judgment, and the heading is not a citable case number. Do not cite it as specific case law — consult a Thai-qualified lawyer for the authoritative Dika number and current application.

    Facts

    A consumer suffered injury, illness, or property damage from a product alleged to be unsafe — a defective vehicle component, contaminated food, faulty electrical appliance, mis-labelled medication, or unsafe cosmetic. The consumer sued the producer (and in some cases the importer or seller) under the Product Liability Act B.E. 2551 (2008).

    Holding

    The Supreme Court has confirmed that Section 5 of the Product Liability Act imposes strict liability on producers (and certain other persons in the supply chain) for damage caused by an 'unsafe product'. The consumer need not prove negligence — only that the product was unsafe and caused damage. Defences are limited (Section 7) and include that the product was not unsafe at the time of placement on the market or that the damage was caused by user misuse. Punitive damages up to twice actual damages are available for wilful or grossly negligent conduct (Section 11).

    Reasoning

    The Act implements consumer-protection policy by reallocating the cost of unsafe products from injured consumers to those best able to prevent the harm. Strict liability avoids the impossible evidential burden on consumers facing complex industrial supply chains.

    Significance

    Most powerful consumer-remedy statute in Thai law. Particularly relevant to imported consumer goods, automotive, food and pharmaceutical sectors.

    Practical Takeaway

    Producers and importers should maintain robust product-safety records and recall procedures. Consumers injured by a product should preserve the product, packaging, receipts, and medical records, and consider a Product Liability Act claim in addition to ordinary tort.

    Cited Statutes

    • Product Liability Act B.E. 2551 (2008), Sections 4, 5, 7, 11
    • Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551 (2008)
    • Civil and Commercial Code, Sections 420–448 (tortious liability — alternative basis)

    This entry summarises a representative line of authority from the Thai Supreme Court (ฎีกา). It is intended for general legal education only and is not a substitute for advice from a Thai-qualified lawyer. Individual Dika case numbers are being verified against primary sources; until then these entries are presented as composite doctrinal summaries.

    Professional Legal Assistance

    When a matter involves investigation, arrest, detention, litigation, or regulatory action, professional legal representation becomes essential.

    Anglo Siam Legal provides experienced legal services across Thailand for both Thai nationals and foreigners.

    feedback.wasThisHelpful