The second lease is a seperate contract and not a renewal of the first lease, as payments (rental) are made in advance against the second contract it makes it a binding agreement under Thai law, and the landowner, current or future, does not need to attend the land office in 30 years time.
No official announcement has been made about it, a Hua Hin lawyer is making enquiries at the Hua Hin Land Office about it.
Most likely it will likely come to nothing, could it be a clever way for the government to effectively allow longer lease periods without actually changing the law and upsetting the nationalists ?. When you read the letter of the law (Civil and Commmerical Codes - Book 3 Specific Contacts, Hire of Property), it could be interpreted that it does not contradict the 30 year rule, ie:
Section 537 - A hire of immovable property is a 'contract' whereby a person, called the letter, agrees to let another person, called the hirer, have the use or benefit of a property for a limited period of time and the hirer agrees to pay rent therefore.
Section 540 - The duration of a hire of immovable property cannot exceed thirty years. If it is made for a longer period, such period shall be reduced to thirty years. The aforesaid period may be renewed, but it must not exceed thirty years from the time of renewal.
All the law says is that a hire 'contract' cannot exceed 30 years, neither contracts do that
, but 'spirit' of the letter of the law it surely breaks.SJ
PS: Yes, ofcourse I know I'm clutching at straws, but I'm bored.
