This Practice Note is part of a multi-jurisdictional guide addressing essential aspects of forming specific business entities in global jurisdictions. Leading law firms in the Multilaw global law firm network answer key questions on this topic. This guide discusses key considerations when forming a private limited company in Thailand. Current as of 13 January 2023. Author: Kobkit Thienpreecha and Athistha Chitranukroh, Tilleke & Gibbins, a Multilaw member firm Common entities 1. What form of entity is the subject of this questionnaire? What other forms of entities are commonly used in this jurisdiction and are the subject of another questionnaire response? The subject of this response is the private limited company. The public limited company and representative office are the subjects of separate responses. 2. Identify other types of entities in your jurisdiction that exist but will not be the subject of a questionnaire response at this time • Limited liability partnership • Regional office General principles 3. What is the main source of law authorising this form of entity? Thai Civil

This Practice Note is part of a multi-jurisdictional guide addressing essential aspects of forming specific business entities in global jurisdictions. Leading law firms in the Multilaw global law firm network answer key questions on this topic. This guide discusses key considerations when forming a public limited company in Thailand. Current as of 13 January 2023. Author: Kobkit Thienpreecha and Athistha Chitranukroh, Tilleke & Gibbins, a Multilaw member firm Common entities 1. What form of entity is the subject of this questionnaire? What other forms of entities are commonly used in this jurisdiction and are the subject of another questionnaire response? The private limited company and the representative office are the subjects of separate responses. 2. Identify other types of entities in your jurisdiction that exist but will not be the subject of a questionnaire response at this time • Regional office • Limited liability partnership General principles 3. What is the main source of law authorising this form of entity? Public Limited Companies Act, B.E. 2535 (1992), as amended. 4.

This Practice Note is part of a multi-jurisdictional guide addressing essential aspects of forming specific business entities in global jurisdictions. Leading law firms in the Multilaw global law firm network answer key questions on this topic. This guide discusses key considerations when forming a representative office in Thailand. Current as of 13 January 2023. Author: Kobkit Thienpreecha and Athistha Chitranukroh, Tilleke & Gibbins, a Multilaw member firm Common entities 1. What form of entity is the subject of this questionnaire? What other forms of entities are commonly used in this jurisdiction and are the subject of another questionnaire response? The subject of this response is the representative office. The public limited company and the private limited company are the subject of separate responses. 2. Identify other types of entities in your jurisdiction that exist but will not be the subject of a questionnaire response at this time • Regional office • Limited liability partnership General principles 3. What is the main source of law authorising this form of entity? Regulations of the Office

This tracker sets out the key decisions and information relating to the proceedings concerning: • patent applications for inventions said to be created by DABUS (device for the autonomous bootstrapping of unified sentience), an AI ‘creativity machine’ built by Dr Stephen Thaler, and • a copyright registration for an image that Thaler’s ‘creativity machine’ had generated It tracks key decisions in the UK, Europe and globally from patent offices, including the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) and the European Patent Office (EPO), and national courts. Apart from South Africa, where substantive examination of patent applications is not conducted, the patent offices and courts of various countries have rejected Thaler’s patent applications on the basis that an AI machine cannot qualify as an inventor under the relevant local patent laws. This means there is a legal consensus that the inventor of a patent must be a human being. Interestingly, in Switzerland, the patent application was rejected on the ground that Swiss patent law requires a ‘natural person’ (human) to be named as the inventor

MLEX: After the UK's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) dropped its four-year probe into Bombardier last week, the opening of a major investigation into Thales represents an important step, as the SFO has faced questions over its recent focus on smaller, domestic cases. The case is the first known corporate bribery probe opened by SFO head Nick Ephgrave since he joined more than a year ago.

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 11 December 2018; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline European Commission merger investigation into the proposed acquisition of Gemalto by Thales (Case M.8797). The proposed transaction involves in particular a horizontal overlap in the market hardware security modules at a European and global level. Latest developments On 21 March 2018, the Commission conditionally approved the transaction, subject to commitments. In terms of commitments, Thales' general purpose hardware security modules business is to be divested. Parties Thales S.A. (Thales), based in France, is a global group active in aeronautics, space, ground transportation, defence and security. Gemalto N.V. (Gemalto), based in the Netherlands, is an international digital security company active in mobile platforms and services, mobile embedded software & products, smart cards, identification documents, government programmes, machine to machine communication (Internet of Things), and enterprise security. Background Under the proposed transaction,

Thames Water Utilities Limited (TWUL) has announced proposals for a liquidity extension transaction. The proposals include up to £3 bn of new super senior funding and maturity extensions.

Law360, London: The historical fine imposed on Thames Water for environmental failings and improper payments to shareholders is a novel use of new legal powers given to the waste and water regulator—and a warning about growing regulatory risks, lawyers say.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: In this case Mr Justice Leech approved a restructuring plan proposed by Thames Water Utilities Holdings Ltd (TWUL) (the ’Plan’). Utilising the cross-class cram down powers under Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006), he dismissed four objections put forward by a class of dissenting creditors (the ‘Class B AHG Creditors’). Leech J also found it was in the public interest to sanction the Plan. This careful and detailed judgment contains a clear example of how to assess the first condition for a cross-class cram down; how to assess fairness between classes where a class is out-of-the-money; and the importance of public interest issues. The judgment also addresses a novel objection to the Plan based on competition grounds, as well as making several practical remarks on the Court’s expectations regarding evidence, and costs, in restructuring proceedings. Written by Hugh Whelan, barrister at Monckton Chambers, and Charlotte McLean, pupil at Monckton Chambers.

Law360, London: A £3bn restructuring plan for Thames Water can go ahead after a London appeals court dismissed a challenge to the rescue deal on 17 March 2025, allowing the beleaguered water company to continue to avoid nationalisation for the time being.

The PSV operator Thandi Red Ltd has received a financial penalty under section 155 of the Transport Act 2000 (TaA 2000) of £1500. This comes after the Traffic Commissioner for West Midlands held a recent public inquiry and found that the operator failed to comply with the Public Service Vehicles (Open Data) (England) Regulations 2020, in particular having failed to provide location data for the vehicles operating the registered services. The penalty is based on a £100 penalty for each of the vehicles authorised on the operator’s licence. The commisioner reduced the authorisation of the operator’s licence from 20 vehicles to 15 vehicles for 14 days.

Thanet District Council has reported that four defendants have been sentenced for criminal activity at flats that they managed and let in a case brought by the Council. According to the Council, the main defendant, Sohila Tamiz, alongside defendants, Pedram Tamiz, Adam, McChesney and Kasem El Darrat managed rented flats in a property in Margate where tenants were routinely harassed. The defendants were found guilty of a total of 28 cases under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 (PEA 1977) by a jury at Canterbury Crown Court. According to the Council, the defendants' offences included conspiring to unlawfully evict a tenant, conspiring to burgle, and conspiring to interfere with and directly interfere with the peace or comfort of a residential occupier.