Table of Contents
Table of contents. 1
Research objectives. 3
General objective. 3
Specific objectives. 3
Research questions. 4
Statement of the Problem.. 4
Justification of the study. 4
Literature review.. 4
This research proposal introduces the topic with an elaboration on how different company laws have worked in the past and what triggered their drafting in Thailand. The different objectives to be achieved are mentioned. The research questions are also raised. The statement of the problem follows the justification of the study and the method of data collection and analysis that will be used. The available literature available about the topic is reviewed conclusions based on that information are reached.
At a time when Thailand is evidencing unprecedented economic and business growth, it is imperative to look at the different key players to the realization of such advancement. Thailand is increasingly becoming a world business attraction and different investors have found it paying to develop ties to enjoy the good business environment. The Kingdom of Thailand has ensured that there are strong business incentives, reliable infrastructure and a politically stable environment. The attractiveness of Thailand to the world has greatly been influenced by policies which encourage liberalized and free trade (Ladd, 2012).
The reforms, which have drastically made Thailand appear attractive in the eyes of investors, have its origin in the 1997 Asian financial crisis. In ensuring that the country does not sink in recession, different measures were taken. The reforms majorly focused on establishing a reliable corporate governance so as to restore the investor’s confidence. A stable statutory framework to govern companies was passed, and two categories of companies were formed. There were those which were known as listed companies and the unlisted companies (Montreevat & Workshop on Corporate Governance Practices and Challenges in Post-Crisis Thailand, 2006).
This research will focus on the different measures under company law statutory provisions and the role they have played through out the years in ensuring stable climate for business. The point of investigation will be whether the mentioned provisions have supported good governance in the company or they have formed hurdles that have hindered thriving of business in Thailand (Leong & ASEAN Roundtable, 2005).
To examine the role played by good governance and company law in Thailand Companies.
To examine the effects of company law on Thailand companies
To examine the impact of good governance on Thailand Companies
What are the effects of company law on Thailand’s companies?
What are the impacts of good governance on Thailand’s companies?
What is the relationship between the two on Thailand’s companies?
Statement of the Problem
The speedy advancement of Thailand’s economy has many theories that seek to explain it. It is undeniable that foreign investment has been the backbone of the mentioned success. The establishment of trading partners in Thailand has been enhanced through incorporated companies rather than individual ventures. Companies have been under the control of company laws and other policies. These laws have been said to support good governance in the companies. The perturbing question is whether there are instances whereby the laws have hindered progress in the companies hence interfering with smooth working of these companies.
Justification of the study
The rationale of this study is to present reliable data on the relationship between Thailand company laws on good governance and the functioning of different companies. Company law provides for numerous steps that are to be followed in the registration of companies. This research will assist in establishing whether the said laws have been perceived as length and tiresome by the respective stakeholders.
This research will apply the qualitative methods of data analyses. The research will rely on the available secondary data, which will be reviewed, and subsequent conclusions reached. Books and articles will be reviewed and conclusions based on that reached.
Regulation of companies and their registration in Thailand is governed by two main legislations. In the first place, there is the Thai Limited Companies Act 1992 as amended by the Thai Public Limited Companies Act (No.2) 2001. The second Act is the Thai Civil and Commercial Code, Title XXII, partnership and Companies (also known as the “CCC”). The Public Limited Companies Act regulates the formation and functioning of public limited companies. Essentially, limited liability companies are set up with an aim of allowing the public to be part of the shareholding through selling of the shares to them. The salient element of limited liability companies is that any liability on the company is limited up to the amount shared or owned by the shareholders (Montreevat & Workshop on Corporate Governance Practices and Challenges in Post-Crisis Thailand, 2006).
On the other hand, the law governing private companies in Thailand has provisions on the limitations related to the shareholding. Unlike public limited liability companies, the private liability companies have stringent restrictions as per the provisions under Thai’s Civil Commercial Code. Partnerships are also considered to be part of the company law, and they are accorded similar protection under the Civil and commercial code (Ladd, 2012).
It is widely advisable that in doing business in Thailand and specifically when the company is a foreign entity, a private limited company is important to form. Transaction made through a limited company is more advantageous compared to other forms of organizations. The structuring of a company is dictated by taxing and other legal requirements (Leong & ASEAN Roundtable, 2005).
There is a growing concern that Thailand has a complicated system of applying and registering for companies. This is mainly that the relevant documents need to be processed. The steps to be followed are not easy, and the process sometimes involves attorneys. In some instances, the foreign companies are given a condition to fulfill. The share capital is also given a priority when one is forming a company (Montreevat & Workshop on Corporate Governance Practices and Challenges in Post-Crisis Thailand, 2006).
There is a strong criticism leveled against the registration of companies in Thailand. The laws have been said to be nationalistic hence a foreigner is highly pressed to meet those standards. For a registration of a company to be complete and the company to be allowed to transact business in Thailand, 49% of the share holding by Thai citizens is a mandatory requirement. It has been stated that foreign companies have been unnecessarily restricted so as to benefit Thailand nationalists. The said issue has greatly affected foreigners, and the registration of a company has become a hard task to complete (Ladd, 2012).
Large forms of investments have occurred amidst the said controversies. The very essential question looming large in both foreign and domestic companies within Thailand is whether the available company laws have assisted in ensuring good corporate governance. Good corporate governance is defined as a set structure whereby the relationship between the company, its management and the shareholders is enhanced to foster competition and put into consideration the interests of all shareholders. In enhancing that principle, corporate governance is considered a necessary principle in ascertaining the success of a given company. The operation of companies in Thailand is modeled in the walls of corporate governance (Leong & ASEAN Roundtable, 2005).
The role played by the company law in making sure that corporate governance is facilitated, and companies achieve their goals is worth examination. There are strong elements that make the principle of good corporate governance. The rights of the shareholders in the company are one element of corporate governance. The Principles of Corporate Governance for Economic Cooperation has given the main elements which make up the principle of corporate governance. Thailand has incorporated some of the said principles in her corporate law (Ladd, 2012).
The first element of corporate governance is to enhance participation of shareholders. This can be achieved through voting and releasing the company’s information on a regular basis to the shareholders. The Public Companies Act has guaranteed shareholders the right to vote and attend meetings. The shareholders are further authorized to invite proxies and vote on their behalf. Further, the right to call for an extraordinary meeting is entrenched in section 100 of the Public Companies Act whereby 25 shareholders holding not less 10% of the total number of shares are given powers to submit a request to the directors who subsequently call for an extraordinary meeting. The written request to the directors is supposed to be adhered and if held the shareholders will have the powers to call for an extra ordinary meeting after a lapse of 30 days. This option is available to shareholders holding not less that 20% of the total shareholding in the company (Sakulrat, 2006).
In recent years, a joint committee in Thailand has been made which consists of the Ministry of Commerce and the Ministry of Finance which has renewed its commitment towards amending the Provisions of section 100 of the Public Companies Act. The joint committee argues that the required shareholding to call for an extra ordinary meeting is unnecessarily high. The committee further claims that the provisions of section 100 of the Public Companies Act favor the majority shareholders at the expense of the minority shareholders. The proposal in the amended is to the effect that the percentage of shareholding should be reduced to 5%. On the other hand, there is a need to dispense the requirements of a certain number of shareholding (Sakulrat, 2006).
Similar suggestions of the amendment have also been proposed by the joint Committee on the civil, commercial code. In this case, the 20 per cent total number of shares should be lowered to 5% per cent so as to put the Civil Commercial Code and Public Companies Act on the same footing.
It is worth stating that after registration the company has powers to own property and exist in perpetuity. Essentially, that means directors and shareholders names can not be used by the company to acquire property. It becomes a separated legal entity with powers to sue and be sued. However, such duties are mainly executed by the directors who are supposed to act in due diligence. The company’s directors are expected to be in a fiduciary relationship with the company and their duties are not only limited on the shareholders but also the companies creditors (Leong & ASEAN Roundtable, 2005).
The powers given to the directors to act with utmost duty of care are sometimes subject to abuse. Therefore, section 87 of the Thai’s Public Companies Act protects the shareholders from any unfair dealings by the directors. The said provision ensures that the directors of the company are prohibited from buying the property of the company or selling it to the company without a full disclosure to the company (Montreevat & Workshop on Corporate Governance Practices and Challenges in Post-Crisis Thailand, 2006).
The provision on the election of members of the board is envisaged under section 70 of the Public Companies Act whereby the shareholding of directors is prescribed by the Act. The elections of directors are by the shareholders who choose either to cast their vote to one director or many directors. One director is supposed to be appointed through a general meeting (Jeffreys & Oxford Business Group, 2009).
It follows that, the power to remove a director solely rests in the hands of the shareholders. According to section 76 of the Public Companies Act, it is provided that the shareholders’ meetings have the powers to pass a resolution to remove a director from office. The shareholders should not be less than 75%, and the number of the shares held should not be less than 50%. The section presents a tight clause which favors the directors stay in office while making it hard for shareholders to remove a director (Ladd, 2012).
The requirement of not less than 75% of the shareholding and 50% of the total number of shares owned has become a hurdle which is too restrictive. In practice, it has proved almost impossible to remove a director from office. The joint committee has also advocated for the restrictive provision to be relaxed so as to allow the shareholders to exercise their will on who to run the affairs of the company (Leong & ASEAN Roundtable, 2005).
There are legal duties entrusted with the directors in the running of the company’s affairs. The code of conduct dictates that directors should perform their duties while observing fairness and integrity. The Public Companies Act provides that, in the exercise of their duties, directors should be loyal and adhere to duty of care. The term fiduciary duty is borrowed from the trust law. Though Trust Law happens to be not part of Thai law, it is clear that its understanding is important in understanding the meaning of fiduciary duty (Jeffreys & Oxford Business Group, 2009).
Trust law present a relationship whereby the trustee holds property from a settler that does not belong to him or her, but it is held for the beneficiaries. The applicability of the said principle in the company law is very vital. Its applicability is to the effect that the directors of a company cannot be regarded as the owners of the property. This is because a company is a corporate entity, but manages the said assets for the benefit of the company. The fiduciary duty was in the past owed to the shareholders and employees of the company. Growth in corporate law indicates that the duty has been extended to include creditors of the company (Sakulrat, 2006).
Breach of the said duties call for the lifting of the veil of limited liability, and the directors are held personally liable. The law takes cognizance of the fact that directors of the company need to have discretionary powers to decide on behalf of the company. The law also draws a thin line between the personal liabilities upon a breach of the fiduciary duty. The law seeks to protect directors who are diligent in performing their duties. To be held personally liable and not facing the consequences due to other directors mistakes is something the law seeks to safeguard (Sakulrat, 2006).
Thai Company law does not provide for a clear guideline on how to limit the directors powers. However, the corporate practices in Thai are not different from others found elsewhere. The different ways in which the director is protected from being sued for breach of fiduciary duty takes many forms. To start with, there must be a sufficient proof that the director acted in good faith and at the best interest of the company while executing the duties. Secondly, the decision making must have been reached in observance of necessary care. Thirdly, there is no scintilla of evidence indicating that there was a conflict of interest when the decision was reached (Ladd, 2012).
There are benchmarks to determine whether a director was in breach of a duty of care or not. First, test of reasonability is very important. The director must have acted, not like an excellent director, but he or she should act the way a reasonable director would have acted under those circumstances. Secondly, the director ought to have acted on an informed point basis. The acting ought not to be triggered by speculation but should be through information. Thirdly, the acting was without reasonable doubt since the information relied on was persuading (Montreevat & Workshop on Corporate Governance Practices and Challenges in Post-Crisis Thailand, 2006).
To a larger extend, the literature reviewed shows that much is lacking in Thailand’s company law to maintain good corporate governance. As already established, the Public Companies Act has provisions which promote corporate governance. However, the same laws have claw back clauses which make it hard for the principle to be embraced in Thailand. The joint committee has tried to propose amendments to the Public Companies Act. This is aimed at allowing some flexibility in making sure that minority shareholders have the powers to vote and remove a director. It is untrue to state that Company law in Thailand has good corporate governance. This is at a time when minority shareholders are not able to call for an extraordinary meeting freely. It is also important to state that much of the Thailand Company law is encouraging and good for business progress. There is a slight modification required so as to make sure that it builds the desired good and flexible corporate governance.
Our Service Charter
Excellent Quality / 100% Plagiarism-FreeWe employ a number of measures to ensure top quality essays. The papers go through a system of quality control prior to delivery. We run plagiarism checks on each paper to ensure that they will be 100% plagiarism-free. So, only clean copies hit customers’ emails. We also never resell the papers completed by our writers. So, once it is checked using a plagiarism checker, the paper will be unique. Speaking of the academic writing standards, we will stick to the assignment brief given by the customer and assign the perfect writer. By saying “the perfect writer” we mean the one having an academic degree in the customer’s study field and positive feedback from other customers.
Free RevisionsWe keep the quality bar of all papers high. But in case you need some extra brilliance to the paper, here’s what to do. First of all, you can choose a top writer. It means that we will assign an expert with a degree in your subject. And secondly, you can rely on our editing services. Our editors will revise your papers, checking whether or not they comply with high standards of academic writing. In addition, editing entails adjusting content if it’s off the topic, adding more sources, refining the language style, and making sure the referencing style is followed.
Confidentiality / 100% No DisclosureWe make sure that clients’ personal data remains confidential and is not exploited for any purposes beyond those related to our services. We only ask you to provide us with the information that is required to produce the paper according to your writing needs. Please note that the payment info is protected as well. Feel free to refer to the support team for more information about our payment methods. The fact that you used our service is kept secret due to the advanced security standards. So, you can be sure that no one will find out that you got a paper from our writing service.
Money Back GuaranteeIf the writer doesn’t address all the questions on your assignment brief or the delivered paper appears to be off the topic, you can ask for a refund. Or, if it is applicable, you can opt in for free revision within 14-30 days, depending on your paper’s length. The revision or refund request should be sent within 14 days after delivery. The customer gets 100% money-back in case they haven't downloaded the paper. All approved refunds will be returned to the customer’s credit card or Bonus Balance in a form of store credit. Take a note that we will send an extra compensation if the customers goes with a store credit.
24/7 Customer SupportWe have a support team working 24/7 ready to give your issue concerning the order their immediate attention. If you have any questions about the ordering process, communication with the writer, payment options, feel free to join live chat. Be sure to get a fast response. They can also give you the exact price quote, taking into account the timing, desired academic level of the paper, and the number of pages.