How to Get a Work Permit in Thailand

A non-Thai citizen may work and operate a business in Thailand as long as he has procured a work permit. It is illegal to work in the Land of Smiles without a work permit.  Without this legal requirement, an expatriate employee or employer could be arrested and be sent to jail even after paying a huge fine.  An expatriate with the intent of working in Thailand should be informed about the application process for obtaining and retaining a work permit in Thailand.

Work Permit Application

A working permit may be granted to an expatriate if his employer can provide the necessary documents for a work permit, and if his proposed occupation is allowable to foreigners.  However, any or most of the following conditions must also be satisfied.

  • The business establishment must have a registered capital of 2,000,000 Baht. If the applicant has a Thai spouse, capitalization may be 1,000,000 Baht only. The norm is to hire one expatriate for every 2,000,000 Baht capital, but up to 10 expatriates only.
  • The business establishment deals with export trade, with a 3,000,000 Baht foreign currency remittance. One expatriate could be hired for every 3,000,000 Baht, but up to 3 foreign employees only.
  • The business establishment should have paid at least 5,000,000 Baht to the Revenue Department in the course of three years. One expatriate is allowed for every 5,000,000 Baht.
  • The business establishment should have at least 50 Thai employees. An expatriate can be hired for every 50 Thai employees, but not more than 5.
  • Any expatriate with a computed personal income tax of at least 18,000 Baht, or has already paid such amount to the Revenue Department may apply for a work permit.

Non-Immigrant Visa Application

Before an expatriate can secure a work permit in Thailand, he needs to have a non-immigrant visa or in some cases, a resident visa. This initial visa must be obtained before going to Thailand.  Below are the requirements for obtaining a non-immigrant visa in one’s country.

  • The applicant must have been offered a legitimate job by a credible Thai company, or will start his own Thai company with himself as an employee.
  • The Thai company has requested a non-immigrant visa for the potential expatriate employee so that the company may apply for the applicant’s work permit.
  • The Thai company can vouch for the applicant’s moral character in terms of his being respectful to Thai culture, and following the laws of the country.

It is best to apply for a visa at least 30 days before he leaves for Thailand. It is the responsibility of the consulate to secure copies of financial statements and registration documents of the Thai company. If a potential expat employee or employer has already secured a non-immigrant visa, he may begin the process of applying for a work permit. The Ministry of Labor processes the work permit application, and if every requirement has been satisfied the process takes 7 business days.

Employee Requirements

  • Non-immigrant Visa
  • Photocopied and signed pages of the passport
  • Departure Card
  • Authenticated copy of educational degree
  • Authenticated Transcript of Records
  • Signed copy of the licenses of certificates of the applicant
  • Curriculum Vitae of the applicant
  • Required photos – 3 copies of 5 x6 cm full face photographs of applicant in business attire.
  • Original and authenticated photocopy of marriage certificate if the applicant is married to a Thai national, including Thai ID of a spouse, birth certificates of children, household registration.

The employer must also provide required work permit documents such as the Commercial Registration Department certificate of the company, certified list of shareholders, a license issued by the Factory Department and Ministry of Industry. VAT certificate and filing, Social Security payment filing and Witholding Tax.  Each document must be duly stamped, sealed, and duly signed by the managing director.  All government-issued certifications must be dated not more than 90 days of the application for the work permit.

If the work is in Bangkok, the foreign applicant should apply at the Ministry of Labor. If the potential job is not in Bangkok, application should be filed at the province’s city hall or the Department of Employment.

Exemptions on Work Permit

According to the Foreign Business Act, there are some occupations that do not necessitate a work permit.  First, any member of the consular missions or diplomatic corps, including their family and personal staff, is exempted from securing a work permit.  Officials of the United Nations and representative of member countries, including their family and personal staff are also exempted from securing work permit. Any individual working for the Thai Kingdom under an official agreement between the Thai government and the employee’s government or affiliated international organization may work in Thailand without a work permit. There are times when the Thai government gives special permission for individuals to work in Thailand.  Any individual working for the benefit of Thai education, sports, arts, and culture may be exempted from getting a work permit.

Regulations

Once an expatriate receives his work permit, he is expected to keep it in his office to carry it during office hours in case of government inspection.  The employee is expected to perform work according to the job specification in the work permit.  If he expects to continue to work in Thailand pass the work permit’s expiration date, it is best to apply for an extension. Lost or damaged work permits must be replaced 15 days from the date of disappearance or damage.  Changes in personal information must be reported to the Employment Service office.  If the employee resigns or is terminated prior to the expiration of his work permit, he must return the work permit within 7 days of his resignation or termination.  Related fines are applied in each case.…

What are Your Legal Rights When Proudly owning a Timeshare?

Lots of men and women make it a level to discover their rights when the lease or get residence or even when they make an investment to protected their retirement.

Nonetheless, when the time arrives to place some of that disposable profits toward a time share a large amount of people falter in understanding their legal rights. Individuals with a substantial quantity of disposable profits are likely to ignore the relevance of understanding and understanding their legal rights for their timeshare mostly simply because it doesn’t impact the protection of their long term.

It is due to the insufficient awareness compensated to the information and facts and deficiency of knowledge though signing any time share contracts or agreements that a lot of investors are caught in fraudulent time share ripoffs.

As with any field, the timeshare field is also susceptible to unethical tactics by unscrupulous people. Incredibly usually there are stories of harmless men and women getting duped into shopping for a timeshare the place the residence doesn’t even exist or in some instances, is not up to the criteria promised. In get to discover from these situations as nicely as reduce them from happening , every single personal really should adhere to a handful of procedures though shopping for a timeshare.

The initial action is to comprehend that there are two key sorts of timeshare programs –deeded time share and suitable to use or license timeshare.

With a deeded timeshare, the purchaser can have the timeshare and use the facility for a particular time period of time every single 12 months for a distinct number of years and also will get a deed or title. The number of years for working with a residence with deeded timeshares is about forty years and simply because there is a deed or title included, this residence can be inherited.

License time shares on the hand signifies that the purchaser is in actuality a licensee and can use the facility like with deeded time shares but does not get a deed of possession and this form of acquisition is not inheritable as the lease expires right after a established number of years

In the new past, the Timeshare field has started employing tactics like the retail or vehicle field. The firm will appeal to awareness by giving what would seem like a tempting existing but in reality is a ploy. Time share companies invite people to shows about a residence in the development stage, nevertheless these shows transform out to be rigorous, superior force advertising classes long lasting for several hours. The attendees are caught unaware in a situation the place the firm will not let a individual go away till they have signed a deed or booked a residence. The attractive gift is no lengthier attractive once a individual will get an idea of what is genuinely happening.

Legally, invitees to any event are needed to be informed of all aspects like the location, agenda and duration of the total application. With timeshares this does not materialize. In addition to not informing the attendees with these aspects, time share companies hardly ever divulge the truth of the matter as legally needed about the sector value and residence ailment.

Lots of timeshare companies are not intended to misinterpret the information and facts about the resale or exchange opportunity of such attributes. The legislation prohibits timeshare companies from excluding oral agreements manufactured prior to the invest in of the residence in the genuine deed as nicely as including any kind of expenses not verbally described. Nonetheless, that getting said, time share procedures change by state the place some states have manufactured it obligatory to include things like a amazing-off time period of two months that let purchasers to cancel their contracts.

In addition, purchasers want to be incredibly certain regardless of whether they genuinely want the timeshare, if they want to invest in or lease the timeshare and be definite about the number of instances they want to exchange their internet sites. A purchaser should inspect the facility and call the much better enterprise bureau. Making contact with the present entrepreneurs of the timeshare residence would give the future purchaser the true photo about the residence.

These elements need specific awareness prior to obtaining any time share in any part of the globe.…

Void & Voidable Contracts

one. INTRODUCTION:

A contract is an agreement which is enforceable at regulation. A contract is composed of two elements: (i) An agreement (ii) The agreement need to be enforceable at regulation

two. VOID Agreement:

According to sec two(g)

An agreement which is not enforceable at regulation is void contract.

Explanation:

The word void implies not binding in regulation. A contract which can not be enforced by possibly bash is void contract.

3. Attributes OF VOID Agreement:

Next are features of void contract

(I) NOT ENFORCEABLE BY Law:

A void contract is not enforceable by regulation.

(II) NO LEGAL RIGHTS:

A void contract generates no legal rights.

(Hi) NO OBLIGATION ON ANY Occasion:

It generates no obligation on any bash.

(IV) Character OF Agreement: 

An agreement which is versus the community policy or versus any regulation is void.

(V) NO Compensation:

NO payment can be compensated to any bash.

4. Examples OF VOID Agreement:

(i) An agreement In restraint of marriage, (ii) An agreement to in restraint in trade.

five. VOIDABLE Agreement:

According to area two(i)

“An agreement which is enforceable by regulation at the solution of just one are additional of the functions there to but not at the solution of the other or other folks is a voidable Agreement.

6. Attributes OF VOIDABLE Agreement:

Next are features of voidable contract.

(I) ENFORCEABLE AT THE Choice OF A single Occasion:

It is enforceable at regulation at the solution of just one or additional functions.

(II) Ideal OF Compensation: 

If the contract is revoked by a individual rightfully then he can also receive the payment.

(III) Stress OF Evidence:

The stress of evidence lies on the bash who promises that his consent has been received by coercion. Fraud and many others.

VOIDABLE AT THE Choice OF A single

 PARTY:

 The contract is voidable at the solution of the bash whose consent is brought on.

(V) Character OF Agreement:

A voidable contract is a legitimate contract till it is averted by the bash acquiring the proper to stay clear of it. When it is averted it will become void.

7. Scenarios OF VOIDABLE Agreement:

(i) Agreement by individual of unsound minded.
(ii) Agreement by undue affect.
(iii) Agreement by Fraud.
(iv) Agreement by coercion.
(v) Agreement by misrepresentation.
(vi) Agreement by insignificant.

8. Difference Concerning VOID AND VOIDABLE Agreement:

(I) AS TO ENFORCEABILITY:

(i) A void contract is not enforceable (ii) A voidable contract is enforceable at the solution of just one or additional functions.

(II) AS TO OBJECTION:

(i) Any bash can use the proper of objection in a void contract.   

(ii) There is no bash who can item the contract.

 (III) AS TO Compensation:

(i) In void contract payment can not be compensated, (ii) Compensation may be claimed in voidable, contract.

(IV) TIME Issue:

(i) A void agreement is void by itself in the commencing (ii) A voidable contract is legitimate into that time when it is averted.

(V) LEGAL Effect:

(i) A void contract has no legal result (ii) A voidable contract has legal result till it is averted.

(VI) COLLATERAL Agreement:

(i) A collateral agreement to void agreement is a void contract, (ii) A collateral agreement is a voidable contract is not a void contract.

9. Conclusion:

To conclude I can say that contract is a lawfully binding agreement in between two or additional folks by which legal rights are acquired by just one or additional to act or for bear just one the aspect of other folks. A void contract is not enforceable at regulation. Whilst voidable a contract is enforceable at the solution of just one bash.…

Genuine Estate Fairness and the Equitable Doctrine of See

In the situation of equitable doctrine, these equitable estates and other rights may possibly come up, wherever there was one extremely crucial distinction involving them and the legal estates acknowledged by the Common Law. A legal proper is explained to be a proper from the complete planet. What is intended by that is that if a gentleman purchases a Jamaican household for sale and there comes about to exist in excess of it some legal rights in the fingers of a person else, the purchaser will be certain by the proper quickly, irrespective of no matter whether he knew of its existence or not.

An equitable proper even so was only binding on a purchaser of a legal Jamaica authentic estate if he knew of its existence at the time when he acquired it. To set this in a various way, the equitable doctrine of observe is that an equitable proper is legitimate from every person except a bona fide purchaser of a legal estate for price without observe of the existence of that equitable proper.

There are selected phrases utilised in the assertion of the equitable doctrine of observe in the previous paragraph which need some even more clarification.

Bona fide – In this occasion means of “in good religion”.

Purchaser – This word utilised listed here, as often in authentic home regulation does not mean simply the gentleman who purchases land. It features also any human being whom the land passes or else other than by descent.

For price – A purchaser for price is one who has offered income or money’s worth for the estate.

See – There are three varieties of observe which may influence the purchaser of a legal estate underneath the equitable doctrine. These notices are:

(a) True See: In this situation the purchaser himself has know-how of the existence of the equitable proper. If this were the only type of observe which influenced the purchaser a gentleman who is crafty may possibly consider good treatment not to examine as well deeply the history of any land for sale in Jamaica which he proposed to purchase and so be certain of having no know-how of any equitable rights. To prevent this from occurring there is yet another type of observe, particularly

(b) Constructive observe: Where the purchaser would have uncovered the existence of some equitable proper experienced he utilised standard diligence and treatment in investigating the history of the Jamaica home, he is considered to have observe of that proper even while he was not essentially knowledgeable of it himself. So if A is instructed that the title deeds of the home features, say, a Will of 1930 and the Will in truth grants an equitable proper to X, A will be considered to have observe of the equitable proper even while he did not bother to glance at the Will.

(c) Imputed observe: Last but not least any know-how of equitable rights which is gained by any agent of the purchaser, these types of as a solicitor or estate agent is imputed to the purchaser himself. This applies both of those to any precise know-how of the agent and also to the constructive know-how as in (b) earlier mentioned. A single prime case in point we like to use are houses for sale in Hanover Jamaica.

Source by Colin Scott

International Law And The Right To A Healthy Environment As A Jus Cogens Human Right

I. JURISPRUDENTIAL BACKGROUND AND THEORETICAL ISSUES

To date, traditional international law does not consider human environmental rights to a clean and healthy environment to be a jus cogens human right. Jus cogens (“compelling law”) refers to preemptory legal principles and norms that are binding on all international States, regardless of their consent. They are non-derogable in the sense that States cannot make a reservation to a treaty or make domestic or international laws that are in conflict with any international agreement that they have ratified and thus to which they are a party. They “prevail over and invalidate international agreements and other rules of international law in conflict with them… [and are] subject to modification only by a subsequent norm… having the same character.” (1) Thus, they are the axiomatic and universally accepted legal norms that bind all nations under jus gentium (law of nations). For example, some U.N. Charter provisions and conventions against slavery or torture are considered jus cogens rules of international law that are nonderogable by parties to any international convention.

While the international legal system has evolved to embrace and even codify basic, non-derogable human rights (2), the evolution of environmental legal regimes have not advanced as far. While the former have found a place at the highest level of universally recognized legal rights, the latter have only recently and over much opposition, reached a modest level of recognition as a legally regulated activity within the economics and politics of sustainable development.

1. The international legal community recognizes the same sources of international law as does the United States’ legal system. The three sources of international law are stated and defined in the Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States (R3dFRLUS), Section 102. The first source is Customary International Law (CIL), defined as the “general and consistent practice of states followed out of a sense of legal obligation” (3) (opinio juris sive necessitatus), rather than out of moral obligation. Furthermore, CIL is violated whenever a State, “as a matter of state policy,… practices, encourages or condones (a) genocide, (b) slavery… (c) the murder or causing the disappearance of individuals, (d) torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment… or (g) a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.” (4) To what extent such human rights need to be “internationally recognized” is not clear, but surely a majority of the world’s nations must recognize such rights before a “consistent pattern of gross violations” results in a violation of CIL. CIL is analogous to “course of dealing” or “usage of trade” in the domestic commercial legal system.

Evidence of CIL includes “constitutional, legislative, and executive promulgations of states, proclamations, judicial decisions, arbitral awards, writings of specialists on international law, international agreements, and resolutions and recommendations of international conferences and organizations.” (5) It follows that such evidence is sufficient to make “internationally recognized human rights” protected under universally recognized international law. Thus, CIL can be created by the general proliferation of the legal acknowledgment (opinio juris) and actions of States of what exactly constitutes “internationally recognized human rights.”

2. The next level of binding international law is that of international agreements (treaties), or Conventional International Law. Just as jus cogens rights and rules of law, as well as CIL, are primary and universally binding legal precepts, so do international treaties form binding international law for the Party Members that have ratified that treaty. The same way that some States’ domestic constitutional law declares the basic human rights of each State’s citizens, so do international treaties create binding law regarding the rights delineated therein, according to the customary international jus gentium principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements are to be respected). Treaties are in turn internalized by the domestic legal system as a matter of law. Thus, for example, the U.N Charter’s provision against the use of force is binding international law on all States and it, in turn, is binding law in the United States, for example, and on its citizens. (6) Treaties are analogous to “contracts” in the domestic legal system.

Evidence of Conventional International Law includes treaties, of course, as well as related material, interpreted under the usual canons of construction of relying on the text itself and the words’ ordinary meanings. (7) Often, conventional law has to be interpreted within the context of CIL. (8) As a practical matter, treaties are often modified by amendments, protocols and (usually technical) annexes. Mechanisms exist for “circumventing strict application of consent” by the party states. Generally, these mechanisms include “framework or umbrella conventions that merely state general obligations and establish the machinery for further norm-formulating devices… individual protocols establishing particular substantive obligations… [and] technical annexes.” (9) Most of these new instruments “do no require ratification but enter into force in some simplified way.” (10) For example, they may require only signatures, or they enter into force for all original parties when a minimum number of States ratify the modification or unless a minimum number of States object within a certain time frame, or goes into force for all except those that object. (11) Depending on the treaty itself, once basic consensus is reached, it is not necessary for all to consent to certain modifications for them to go into effect. “[I]n a sense these are instances of an IGO [(international governmental organization)] organ ‘legislating’ directly for [S]tates.” (12)

3. Finally, rules of international law are also derived from universal General Principles of Law “common to the major legal systems of the world.” (13) These “general principles of law” are principles of law as such, not of international law per se. While many consider these general principles to be a secondary source of international law that “may be invoked as supplementary rules… where appropriate” (14), some consider them on an “footing of formal equality with the two positivist elements of custom and treaty”. (15) Examples are the principles of res judicata, equity, justice, and estoppel. Frequently, these rules are inferred by “analogy to domestic law concerning rules of procedure, evidence and jurisdiction.” (16) However, “while shared concepts of of internal law can be used as a fall-back, there are sever limits because of the characteristic differences between international law and internal law.” (17) Evidence of General Principles of Law includes “municipal laws, doctrine and judicial decisions.” (18)

Treaty provisions and their inherent obligations can create binding CIL if they are “of a fundamentally norm-creating character such as could be regarded as forming the basis of a general rule of law.” (19) A basic premise of this article is that the “relatively exclusive ways (of lawmaking) of the past are not suitable for contemporary circumstances.” (20) Jonathan Charney maintains that today’s CIL is more and more being created by consensual multilateral forums, as opposed to State practice and opinio juris, and that “[consensus, defined as the lack of expressed objections to the rule by any participant, may often be sufficient… In theory, one clearly phrased and strongly endorsed declaration at a near-universal diplomatic forum could be sufficient to establish new international law.” (21) This process should be distinguished conceptually as “general international law”, rather than CIL, as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has often done.

In like vein, Professor Gunther Handl argues that all multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) of “global applicability” create “general international law”:

“A multilateral treaty that addresses fundamental concerns of the international community at large, and that as such is strongly supported by the vast majority of states, by international organizations and other transnational actors,– and this is, of course, precisely the case with the biodiversity, climate, and ozone regimes, among others-may indeed create expectations of general compliance, in short such a treaty may come to be seen as reflecting legal standards of general applicability… and as such must be deemed capable of creating rights and obligations both for third states and third organizations.” (22)

Notwithstanding, Daniel Bodansky argues that CIL is so rarely supported by State action, that it is not customary law at all. “International environmental norms reflect not how states regularly behave, but how states speak to each other.” (23) Calling such law “declarative law” that is part of a “myth system” representing the collective ideals and the “verbal practice” of States, he concludes that “our time and efforts would be better spent attempting to translate the general norms of international environmental relations into concrete treaties and actions.” (24)

However, a review of the current status of international human rights and environmental law may reveal the mechanisms for raising environmental rights to the level of jus cogens rights. For example, the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS), whose negotiation was initiated in 1972 and signed in 1982, was considered by most countries to be CIL by the time it came into force in 1994. (25)

II. CURRENT STATUS OF THE RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT No State today will publicly state that it is within its sovereign rights to damage their domestic environment, much less that of the international community, however most States do not guarantee environmental protection as a basic human right. Currently, environmental law is composed of mostly Conventional International Law and some CIL. The former relies on express consent and the latter on implied consent, unless a State avails itself of the Persistent Objector principle, which precludes it from being bound by even most CIL. Unlike for human rights and international crimes, there is no general environmental rights court in existence today. While the Law of the Sea Tribunal and other U.N. forums (e.g., the ICJ) exist for trying cases of treaty violations, non-treaty specific violations have no international venue at present. Italian Supreme Court Justice Amedeo Postiglione states that

“[T]he human right to the environment, must have, at the international level, a specific organ of protection for a fundamental legal and political reason: the environment is not a right of States but of individuals and cannot be effectively protected by the International Court of Justice in the Hague because the predominantly economic interests of the States and existing institutions are often at loggerheads with the human right to the environment.” (26)

Domestic remedies would have to be pursued first, of course, but standing would be granted to NGOs, individuals, and States when such remedies proved futile or “the dispute raises issues of international importance.” (27) For example, although the ICJ has an “environmental chamber” and U.S. courts often appoint “special masters” to handle these types of disputes, it is clear that the recognition of the human right to the environment needs an international court of its own in order to recognize such a right and remedy international violations in an efficient and equitable manner. (28)

III. THE JUS COGENS NATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS Irrespective of specific treaty obligations and domestic environmental legislation, do States, or the international community as a whole, have a duty to take measures to prevent and safeguard against environmental hazards?

Human rights are “claims of entitlement” that arise “as of right” (31) and are independent of external justification; they are “self evident” and fundamental to any human being living a dignified, healthy and productive and rewarding life. As Louis Henkin points out:

“Human rights are not some abstract, inchoate ‘good’; they are defined, particular claims listed in international instruments such as the [U.N.’s] Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the major covenants and conventions. They are those benefits deemed essential for individual well-being [sic], dignity, and fulfillment, and that reflect a common sense of justice, fairness, and decency. [No longer are human rights regarded as grounded in or justified by utilitarianism,] natural law,… social contract, or any other political theory…[but] are derived from accepted principles, or are required by accepted ends-societal ends such as peace and justice; individual ends such as human dignity, happiness, fulfillment. [Like the fundamental rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, these rights are] inalienable and imprescriptible; they cannot be transferred, forfeited, or waived; they cannot be lost by having been usurped, or …