DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISM FOR PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP CONTRACTS IN THAILAND: THE NEED FOR ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION?
Keywords:
Public-private Partnership, PPP, Alternative Dispute Resolution, ADRAbstract
This article explores the suitability of using litigation as a method of resolving disputes under public-private partnership contracts in Thailand. It concludes that court litigation has a number of key limitations for resolving disputes under PPP contracts such as the risk of having parallel dispute proceedings in PPP projects, the lengthy process of dispute resolution, parties’ loss of control over the dispute, as well as privacy and confidentiality issues. As an alternative, the article suggests using alternative dispute resolution to overcome these limitations. However, alternative dispute resolution still has its own set of challenges in resolving disputes under public-private partnership contracts given the current legal framework and government policies in Thailand.
References
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, ‘PPP Policy, Legal and Institutional Frameworks in Asia and the Pacific’ (Conference Paper, High-Level Dialogue on Financing for Development in Asia and the Pacific, April 2017) 16.
ประกาศคณะกรรมการนโยบายการร่วมลงทุนระหว่างรัฐและเอกชน เรื่อง รายละเอียดของร่างประกาศเชิญชวน ร่างเอกสารสำหรับการคัดเลือกเอกชน และสาระสำคัญของร่างสัญญาร่วมลงทุน พ.ศ. 2563 [Notification of the Public-Private Partnership Policy Committee RE: Details of Invitation for Bids, Documents for Selection of Private Parties, and Material Terms of Public-Private Partnership Contract BE 2563] (Thailand).
See Secretariat of Cabinet of Thailand, ขอแก้ไขมติคณะรัฐมนตรีวันที่ 28 กรกฎาคม 2552 (เรื่อง การเข้าทำสัญญาระหว่างหน่วยงานของรัฐกับเอกชน) [Request for Approval to Amend the Cabinet Resolution dated 28 July 2009 (RE: Entering into of Contracts between Government Authorities and Private Parties] (NorRor0503/Wor228, 17 July 2015) (‘Cabinet Resolution Dated 14 July 2015’).
Panita Paoanphongkul, ‘Legal Problems Relating to the Dispute Resolution by an Arbitration under a Contract for the Private Participation in State Understanding Under the Private Participation in State Understanding, B.E. 2556’ (LLM Thesis, Dhurakij Pundit University, 2016) 110-9.; Danuphat Visuthpakdee, ปัญหาทางกฎหมายในการระงับข้อพิพาทในสัญญาร่วมลงทุนระหว่างรัฐและเอกชนตามพระราชบัญญัติการร่วมลงทุนระหว่างรัฐและเอกชน พ.ศ. 2562 [Legal Problems on Settlement of Disputes under Public-private Partnership Contracts under the Public Private Partnership Act B.E. 2562] (Article, 2019) <http://www.lawgrad.ru.ac.th/Abstracts/436>.
Donald Charrett, ‘Lex Constructionis – Or My Country’s Rules?’ (2021) International Construction Law Review 61.
United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Legislative Guide on Privately Financed Infrastructure Project, 33rd Sess., UN Doc A/CN.9/SER.B/4 (2001) 174-5.
Mark Moseley, ‘Restoring Confidence in Public-Private Partnerships: Reforming Risk Allocation and Creating More Collaborative PPPs’ (2020) 41 Governance Brief 1, 5.
Dough Jones and Janet Walker, ‘Resolving Infrastructure Disputes: the Interplay between International Commercial Courts and International Arbitration’ (2022) International Construction Law Review 122, 123.
Owen Hayford, ‘Improving the Outcomes of Public Private Partnerships – Lessons from Australia’ (2013) International Construction Law Review 457, 463-4.
Owen Hayford and Dominic Mueller, ‘Better Dispute Resolution for PPPs’, Infralegal (Article, 5 December 2021) 2 <https://www.infralegal.com.au/dispute-avoidance-and-resolution/better-dispute-resolution-for-ppps>.
See E.R. Yescombe and Edward Farquharson, Public-Private Partnerships for Infrastructure (Butterworth-Heinemann, 2nd ed, 2018) 143; Tim M Burbury and Khaled Dahlawi, ‘Back-to-back – the pass-through of construction risk from project agreement through to subcontracts under public private partnerships (PPPs) and energy infrastructure projects’, Lexology (Web Page, 1 February 2013) <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f38fd554-bbc2-4b37-a90c-fc78eb7d68af>.
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Guidance on PPP Contractual Provision (2019).
พระราชบัญญัติจัดตั้งศาลปกครองและวิธีพิจารณาคดีปกครอง [Act on Establishment of Administrative Courts and Administrative Court Procedure] (Thailand) 10 October 1999, s 3, 9(4). See also Niratchara Pong-ajarn, ‘The Direction Towards Administrative Contracts in According with Thai Legal System’ (2019) Journal of Ombudsman 113, 122-3 <http://ombstudies.ombudsman.go.th/ewt_news.php?nid=893>.
Chaosaard, รายการศาลปกครองพบประชาชน [Administrative Court Meeting People] (YouTube, 13 March 2017) 00:24:35-00:25:00 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BZ7IlE2ecA&t=835s>.
Supreme Administrative Court no. Aor 221-223/2562 (2019). See also ‘The Conclusion of the Hopewell Case that Lasted for more than 30 years’ Thai Arbitration Center (Web Page, 24 July 2020) <https://thac.or.th/the-conclusion-of-the-hopewell-case-that-lasted-for-more-than-30-years/>.
Anne Coulon, ‘Mediation: A Star in the Making as a Dispute Resolution Method for Commercial Disputes (Focus on Thailand)’ DFDL (Web Page, 25 November 2021) <https://www.dfdl.com/resources/legal-and-tax-updates/mediation-a-star-in-the-making-as-a-dispute-resolution-method-for-commercial-disputes-focus-on-thailand/>.
Djakhongir Saidov, ‘An International Convention on Expert Determination and Dispute Boards?’ (2022) International and Comparative Law Quarterly 697, 699.
Peter Chapman, ‘the Use of Dispute Boards on Major Infrastructure Projects’ (2015) 1(3) Turkish Commercial Law Review, 219, 219.
Chokchai Netngamsawang and Ukrit Sornprohm, ‘คณะกรรมการข้อพิพาท (Dispute Board) ทางเลือกใหม่ของไทยในการบริหารจัดการข้อพิพาท? [Dispute Board the New Alternative for Management of Disputes?]’, Thailand Arbitration Center (Web Page, 30 December 2020) <https://thac.or.th/th/คณะกรรมการข้อพิพาท/>.
Owen Hayford, ‘Want to Avoid Construction Disputes, Delays and Cost Overruns? Use a Dispute Board!’ Infralegal (Web Page, 12 March 2019) <https://www.infralegal.com.au/dispute-avoidance-and-resolution/blog-post-title-one-9ayeg>.
Giuseppe Giancarlo Franco, ‘The Legal Status and the Enforcement of the Dispute Board Decision’ (2019) International Construction Law Review 193, 197-201.
Richard Linton, ‘Dispute boards: an essential investment or a costly mistake?’ Lexology (Blog Post, 9 June 2021) <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bc4ddb37-6e5a-4d53-b91a-4f1fbfe3b1e0>.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 THAC Journals
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
