Thailand has not been a signatory to any international conventions on the arrest of ships. The rules that permit the detention of a ship are set out in two pieces of legislation, each active at different stages. The most prominent legislation for ship detention is the Arrest of Ships Act, B.E. 2534 (1991) (the ASA) which governs the detention prior to the commencement of the substantive claim in the court or arbitration. Another piece of legislation is the Civil Procedure Code (the CPC) which applies to detention after the commencement of the substantive claim to the court or arbitration. The latter regime is much more complicated, making the process of acquiring an injunction more challenging.
With regard to the ASA, claimants entitled to apply for arrest are restricted to those who have maritime claims which embrace loss of life, personal injury, or property damage due to ship operations, salvage, a contract relating to use or hire of a ship or other similar contracts, including a charterparty, a contract of carriage of goods by sea under a bill of lading, general average, damage to cargo, towage and pilotage, supply of any materials to a ship, shipbuilding, repair or shipyard fees, port charges and dues, stevedoring, master’s or crew’s wages, ship expenses, ship ownership, and disputes between co-owners and ship mortgages. On the contrary, the CPC permits detention for claimants with other claims, not just those with maritime claims.
The ASA does not make clear whether the court can keep the security obtained from an arrest for a claim that will be determined in arbitration or a court in another jurisdiction. In practice, it is advised that the claimant arrests the vessel and negotiate with the relevant P&I club, shipowner, and/or charterer to obtain a form of security, such as a letter of undertaking and/or a bank letter of guarantee with proper wording, and then request that the court release the arrested vessel. In this circumstance, such security in lieu of the vessel herself could be utilised worldwide.