2690-2538

Glossaries

Term	Definition
2690-2538	If a Thai holds land “in name only” for a foreigner who supplied the money and controls it, the deal is void under section 150 of the civil and commercial code and section 86 of the Land Code Act and section 94 applies and land disposal kicks in. Decision 2690/2538 (1995): “Name-Only” Thai Title for a Foreigner Triggers Disposal A foreign plaintiff funded the purchase of a plot but had a Thai individual registered as the owner on the title deed. The Supreme Court held that this was a nominee/agency setup for a foreigner: the juristic act is void under Land Code section 86. However, the Court applied Land Code section 94, treating the foreigner as the true acquirer for purposes of disposal, so the land must be disposed of within the period fixed by the Director-General of the Department of Lands; failing that, the Director-General may force the sale. Why the ruling matters Substance over form: If a Thai holds land “in name only” for a foreigner who supplied the money/controls it, the deal is void; Section 94 disposal kicks in. Outcome = sale, not legalization: The fix is forced disposal, typically with the foreigner setting the price and receiving the proceeds, per Land Department practice. Buildings vs. land: The disposal duty targets the land; Thai commentary notes buildings themselves aren’t per se prohibited for foreigners. Enforcement risk: Using a nominee exposes both sides to penalties under the Land Code; the Department of Lands can order disposal and pursue violations. Thai Real Estate Legal “start” →

Term

Definition

If a Thai holds land “in name only” for a foreigner who supplied the money and controls it, the deal is void under section 150 of the civil and commercial code and section 86 of the Land Code Act and section 94 applies and land disposal kicks in.

Decision 2690/2538 (1995): “Name-Only” Thai Title for a Foreigner Triggers Disposal

A foreign plaintiff funded the purchase of a plot but had a Thai individual registered as the owner on the title deed. The Supreme Court held that this was a nominee/agency setup for a foreigner: the juristic act is void under Land Code section 86. However, the Court applied Land Code section 94, treating the foreigner as the true acquirer for purposes of disposal, so the land must be disposed of within the period fixed by the Director-General of the Department of Lands; failing that, the Director-General may force the sale.

Why the ruling matters

Substance over form: If a Thai holds land “in name only” for a foreigner who supplied the money/controls it, the deal is void; Section 94 disposal kicks in.
Outcome = sale, not legalization: The fix is forced disposal, typically with the foreigner setting the price and receiving the proceeds, per Land Department practice.
Buildings vs. land: The disposal duty targets the land; Thai commentary notes buildings themselves aren’t per se prohibited for foreigners.
Enforcement risk: Using a nominee exposes both sides to penalties under the Land Code; the Department of Lands can order disposal and pursue violations.

Thai Real Estate Legal “start” →