Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand

This research addresses the issue of enforceability of mutual indemnity and hold harmless clauses (MIHH) pertaining to bodily injury and death in oilfield service contracts in Thailand. Thai Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2540 (A.D. 1997) (“TUCTA”) prohibits a contracting party to restrict or exclud...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors:	Wan Zahari, Wan Mohd Zulhafiz, Md. Radzi, Mohd Shahril Nizam
Format:	Conference or Workshop Item
Language:	English
Published:	National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA) 2016
Subjects:	K Law (General)
Online Access:	http://irep.iium.edu.my/54623/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/54623/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/54623/1/ENFORCEABILITY%20OF%20KNOCK-FOR-KNOCK%20INDEMNITIES%20IN%20OILFIELD%20SERVICE%20CONTRACTS%20IN%20THAILAND.pdf

id	iium-54623
recordtype	eprints
spelling	iium-546232017-03-01T03:58:12Z http://irep.iium.edu.my/54623/ Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand Wan Zahari, Wan Mohd Zulhafiz Md. Radzi, Mohd Shahril Nizam K Law (General) This research addresses the issue of enforceability of mutual indemnity and hold harmless clauses (MIHH) pertaining to bodily injury and death in oilfield service contracts in Thailand. Thai Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2540 (A.D. 1997) (“TUCTA”) prohibits a contracting party to restrict or exclude liabilities pertaining to bodily injury and death arising from his negligence. This restriction might be thought to have an effect of hampering the risk allocation. Similar restriction contains under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (“UCTA”). However, by virtue of the Supreme Court decision in Farstad Supply A/S VS Enviroco Ltd [2011] UKSC 16, the MIHH could be enforceable despite the restriction. Nevertheless, the IMHH will be subject to the reasonableness test under UCTA. Thus, it could be argued that in spite of the restriction under TUCTA, the IMHH in standard form oilfield service contracts e.g., LOGIC could still be enforceable in Thailand, subject to certain limitations. National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA) 2016 Conference or Workshop Item PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://irep.iium.edu.my/54623/1/ENFORCEABILITY%20OF%20KNOCK-FOR-KNOCK%20INDEMNITIES%20IN%20OILFIELD%20SERVICE%20CONTRACTS%20IN%20THAILAND.pdf Wan Zahari, Wan Mohd Zulhafiz and Md. Radzi, Mohd Shahril Nizam (2016) Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand. In: The Fifth International Conference on Advancement of Development Administration 2016—Social Sciences and Interdisciplinary Studies (The 5th ICADA 2016—SSIS), 26th-28th May 2016, Bangkok, Thailand. http://www.icada2017.nida.ac.th/main/images/icada2017/the%20proceedings%20of%20the%205th%20icada%202016%20with%20cover.pdf
repository_type	Digital Repository
institution_category	Local University
institution	International Islamic University Malaysia
building	IIUM Repository
collection	Online Access
language	English
topic	K Law (General)
spellingShingle	K Law (General) Wan Zahari, Wan Mohd Zulhafiz Md. Radzi, Mohd Shahril Nizam Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand
description	This research addresses the issue of enforceability of mutual indemnity and hold harmless clauses (MIHH) pertaining to bodily injury and death in oilfield service contracts in Thailand. Thai Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2540 (A.D. 1997) (“TUCTA”) prohibits a contracting party to restrict or exclude liabilities pertaining to bodily injury and death arising from his negligence. This restriction might be thought to have an effect of hampering the risk allocation. Similar restriction contains under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (“UCTA”). However, by virtue of the Supreme Court decision in Farstad Supply A/S VS Enviroco Ltd [2011] UKSC 16, the MIHH could be enforceable despite the restriction. Nevertheless, the IMHH will be subject to the reasonableness test under UCTA. Thus, it could be argued that in spite of the restriction under TUCTA, the IMHH in standard form oilfield service contracts e.g., LOGIC could still be enforceable in Thailand, subject to certain limitations.
format	Conference or Workshop Item
author	Wan Zahari, Wan Mohd Zulhafiz Md. Radzi, Mohd Shahril Nizam
author_facet	Wan Zahari, Wan Mohd Zulhafiz Md. Radzi, Mohd Shahril Nizam
author_sort	Wan Zahari, Wan Mohd Zulhafiz
title	Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand
title_short	Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand
title_full	Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand
title_fullStr	Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand
title_full_unstemmed	Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand
title_sort	enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in thailand
publisher	National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA)
publishDate	2016
url	http://irep.iium.edu.my/54623/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/54623/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/54623/1/ENFORCEABILITY%20OF%20KNOCK-FOR-KNOCK%20INDEMNITIES%20IN%20OILFIELD%20SERVICE%20CONTRACTS%20IN%20THAILAND.pdf
first_indexed	2023-09-18T21:17:16Z
last_indexed	2023-09-18T21:17:16Z
_version_	1777411645909237760

Enforceability of knock-for-knock indemnities in oilfield service contracts in Thailand

Similar Items