People eat lunch at a street food restaurant implementing social distancing measures with plastic dividers on the tables after the Thai government relaxed measures to combat the spread of the COVID-19 novel coronavirus, in Bangkok on May 7, 2020. Thailand began easing restrictions related to the COVID-19 novel coronavirus on May 3 by allowing various businesses to reopen, but warned that the stricter measures would be re-imposed should cases increase again.

 

Thailand’s Civil Court accepted a class action lawsuit today (Monday), filed by a group of 39 restaurateurs in Bangkok and upcountry provinces, demanding 50 million baht in compensation from Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and the others for damage to their businesses caused by lockdown restrictions imposed under the Government’s Emergency Decree.

 

The group is led by Mr. Duangrit Bunnag, the proprietor of The Never Ending Summer company, and Mrs. Sor Rattanamani Polkla.

 

Mrs. Sor told the media this morning, at the Civil Court, that the group are seeking redress from the prime minister, finance, interior and public health ministries and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration, for their collective mismanagement of the efforts to contain the COVID-19 pandemic and in the issuance of restrictions, rendering damage to their businesses.

 

Full Story: https://www.thaipbsworld.com/restaurateurs-file-class-action-suit-against-pm-others-demanding-50-million-baht/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2021-09-27

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow ASEAN NOW on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

50 million baht.  I am surprised it is so little.  Good luck with that lawsuit anyway.

I hope they win, but I doubt they will.

 

If they do, the 'claim' flood gates will be so wide open that thailand wont have reserves to cover the the incoming claims avalanche.

1 hour ago, RichardColeman said:

I hope they win, but I doubt they will.

 

If they do, the 'claim' flood gates will be so wide open that thailand wont have reserves to cover the the incoming claims avalanche.

No chance, the facts of a claim are very important in determining whether the government can be held liable for damage to your business. Generally, the government is not responsible for having a passive role in causing harm to a business. However, when damages are caused by the negligent act of someone working for the government and that act was within the scope of their employment, the government may be liable. 

Prayuth & Co have given themselves immunity from the law so this action is merely grabbing a headline.

14 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Mrs. Sor told the media this morning, at the Civil Court, that the group are seeking redress from the prime minister, finance, interior and public health ministries and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration, for their collective mismanagement of the efforts to contain the COVID-19 pandemic and in the issuance of restrictions, rendering damage to their businesses.

This'll be interesting.

Amazing Thailand, land of silly lawsuits.

6 hours ago, it is what it is said:

No chance, the facts of a claim are very important in determining whether the government can be held liable for damage to your business. Generally, the government is not responsible for having a passive role in causing harm to a business. However, when damages are caused by the negligent act of someone working for the government and that act was within the scope of their employment, the government may be liable. 

I think the U turns should prove enough. The times they were told they could open and postponed. That costs them food and other stuff that they bought and then could not sell. That would be one of the points.

2 hours ago, mikebell said:

Prayuth & Co have given themselves immunity from the law so this action is merely grabbing a headline.

Immunity from personal prosecution, not this and this will hit the state coffers not them personal. So i doubt the protection covers it. However they do have a lot of influence in the courts and if this case goes against them its like a huge pie on the face as it shows they are responsible. That means people can blame them in public for stuff with this verdict.

 

So chances are not that high.

The justice system in Thailand ....        not a chance in hell 

1 hour ago, SmartyMarty said:

Amazing Thailand, land of silly lawsuits.

Shouldn't that be the "hub" of silly lawsuits?

????

2 hours ago, steven100 said:

The justice system in Thailand ....        not a chance in hell 

Well why doesn't your hero the unelected PM do something about it?

2 hours ago, robblok said:

I think the U turns should prove enough. The times they were told they could open and postponed. That costs them food and other stuff that they bought and then could not sell. That would be one of the points.

the u turns happened in many other countries, even in the so-called first world

5 hours ago, mikebell said:

Prayuth & Co have given themselves immunity from the law so this action is merely grabbing a headline.

most world leaders have full immunity for making those kind of hard decisions,

 

however, they can be taken to court if it's proven that they were negligent in their duty (see rice scandal case)

 

for covid, it will be hard to prove they were negligent, even though lockdowns could be argued to be "over-reaction" to a problem that has cost working people a lot of damage financially

10 minutes ago, cTay said:

the u turns happened in many other countries, even in the so-called first world

nobody knew what they were doing back then, the lockdowns were particularly unnecessarily harsh and to make things worse, they were all copying each other in their mistakes, as some kind of global consensus

 

this is the best protection they have if they go to court, "everybody else was doing it" ????

So they would rather be infected than to lose business?

17 minutes ago, cTay said:

the u turns happened in many other countries, even in the so-called first world

Not as often and crazy as in Thailand. Not on such short notice. 

5 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

nobody knew what they were doing back then, the lockdowns were particularly unnecessarily harsh and to make things worse, they were all copying each other in their mistakes, as some kind of global consensus

 

this is the best protection they have if they go to court, "everybody else was doing it" ????

Not sure where your from but lockdowns have proven to work to slow the virus down so healthcare did not get flooded. Worked pretty good for that. Then vaccines did the rest. 

 

Then again plenty of antivaxers and other idiots still deny it worked. 

4 minutes ago, EricTh said:

So they would rather be infected than to lose business?

infected doesn't mean they die automatically, but losing a business, can make you seriously ill or die

 

harsh choice, but covid was paid for by small and medium size businesses without compensation, not government aids

2 minutes ago, robblok said:

Not sure where your from but lockdowns have proven to work to slow the virus down so healthcare did not get flooded. Worked pretty good for that. Then vaccines did the rest. 

 

Then again plenty of antivaxers and other idiots still deny it worked. 

we have been through this before, the slowdown was marginal, and I am pretty sure new studies in the future will debunk the idea that lockdowns work. They never work, but they created plenty of new problems.

 

I don't call something "work" when the result is so "weak"

 

6 minutes ago, robblok said:

Not as often and crazy as in Thailand. Not on such short notice. 

wrong again, plenty of countries in Europe were as crazy as Thailand, but you are not there so you wouldn't know

 

the UK is one example with Boris doing 180 over 24H, France of course, and Australia and NZ are still in the madness game, they didn't get enough of it apparently ????

2 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

we have been through this before, the slowdown was marginal, and I am pretty sure new studies in the future will debunk the idea that lockdowns work. They never work, but they created plenty of new problems.

 

I don't call something "work" when the result is so "weak"

 

Sure mate, keep on drinking the cool aid. 

Just now, robblok said:

Sure mate, keep on drinking the cool aid. 

says that to the researchers who are working on the lockdowns case ????

 

you seem to believe everything a government tells you, a good customer ????

Just now, GrandPapillon said:

says that to the researchers who are working on the lockdowns case ????

 

you seem to believe everything a government tells you, a good customer ????

No I don't believe the government. I believe logic and science. Anyway i prefer not to get in too many arguments with your kind. 

 

Lockdowns work, unless you think limiting contact does not work. 

8 minutes ago, robblok said:

No I don't believe the government. I believe logic and science. Anyway i prefer not to get in too many arguments with your kind. 

 

Lockdowns work, unless you think limiting contact does not work. 

you are dreaming, and yes you have every right to believe in fairy tales

 

pointless discussions, it's like arguing with Talibans ????

 

Virus wasn't told about the "lockdowns" ????

 

like everything else in this crisis, we will know eventually the "facts" in the next 10 years, so let's agree that the jury is still out there ????

 

lockdowns were buying time, not "slowing down" the actual spread in numbers over a long period, which happened eventually as waves.

Edited September 28, 20214 yr by GrandPapillon

can you imagine if we didn't have the vaccine? we would still be looking at "lockdowns" as a solution ????

 

like in the middle age :p

 

oh yeah, that worked very well :)

18 hours ago, GrandPapillon said:

nobody knew what they were doing back then,

Are you saying Prayuth and his mob know what they are doing now ?

19 hours ago, possum1931 said:

22 hours ago, steven100 said:

The justice system in Thailand ....        not a chance in hell 

Well why doesn't your hero the unelected PM do something about it?

'Coz he don't have a clue.

19 hours ago, GrandPapillon said:

we have been through this before, the slowdown was marginal, and I am pretty sure new studies in the future will debunk the idea that lockdowns work. They never work, but they created plenty of new problems.

 

I don't call something "work" when the result is so "weak"

 

how wrong you are,  Lockdowns do reduce transmission of the virus.

19 hours ago, GrandPapillon said:

you are dreaming, and yes you have every right to believe in fairy tales

 

pointless discussions, it's like arguing with Talibans ????

 

Virus wasn't told about the "lockdowns" ????

 

like everything else in this crisis, we will know eventually the "facts" in the next 10 years, so let's agree that the jury is still out there ????

 

lockdowns were buying time, not "slowing down" the actual spread in numbers over a long period, which happened eventually as waves.

Your really not that bright as slowing down and buying time is the same thing. That was the main strategy for lockdowns making sure that health care did not overflow. We seen countries where it happend also Thailand where people died on the street. That is what lockdowns are for slowing it down until enough vaccinations have been given. Most countries go out of lockdown once a certain number of people had vaccines. 

 

Nobody ever said lockdowns were a solution they were just there to slow stuff down. That is what every government said. They did  not see it as a solution. If you thought that you must have missed a lot of stuff.

 

Buying time and slowing down is the same. When in a battle an unit needs to buy down it has to slow down the enemy until other measurers are in place or until stuff has been doen.

Edited September 29, 20214 yr by robblok