Bangkok– A Thai court ruled Tuesday that the operator of a major gold mine in northern Thailand is responsible for environmental damage and health effects on nearby villagers, in a long-awaited ruling that could set a precedent for climate litigation in the country.
The case stems from a 2016 class action lawsuit filed by hundreds of villagers in Phichit Province who accused the Australian-owned Chattree Gold Mine of causing toxic contamination through its operations. The Bangkok Civil Court found the company liable and ordered it to compensate affected residents.
The decision could determine whether communities view the courts as “a path forward or a dead end,” said Emily Palami Pradichitt of the Bangkok-based human rights group Manushya Foundation, which is supporting the villagers in the lawsuit.
Legal analysts say the decision could set a positive precedent for future climate cases in Thailand and set a new standard for environmental law in Southeast Asia. These types of “polluter pays” cases are becoming more common across the region, reflecting a global trend of increasing climate litigation.
Jamila Joy Reyes of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment said the decision was a “clarion call for many of the cases currently underway” in other Southeast Asian countries such as the Philippines and Indonesia.
Courts often look to decisions from other jurisdictions to guide decisions, even if those precedents are not binding, according to Reyes, who said this is especially true in new legal areas like climate litigation.
More than 300 villagers filed the case against Akara Resources, the operator of the Chatri gold mine, Thailand’s largest mine which is owned by Australia-based Kingsgate Consolidated. The case was the country’s first environmental class action following a 2015 legal amendment allowing such lawsuits.
They blamed toxic runoff from the mine, with medical surveys showing elevated levels of heavy metals including arsenic, cyanide and manganese among residents. On Tuesday, the judge said the company failed to prove the contamination was unrelated to its operations and ordered it to pay compensation of 50,000 ($1,535) to 200,000 baht ($6,143) per affected person, as well as pay for medical care and emotional distress.
Chatri’s legal dispute It involves several cases, several medical surveys and a counter-suit. There was also direct interference from the past in this Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ochawho exercised extensive powers Under the post-coup military government Stopping mining operations.
Kingsgate sued the Thai government in 2017 for unfair license revocation. Last year an agreement was reached between the two parties.
Thanyalak Boontham, one of the plaintiffs, said his blood test found toxin levels higher than safety standards. Although the compensation fell short of expectations, they welcomed the decision.
“This fight is also for our future generations,” he said outside the court after the verdict. “I would like them to be able to grow up in a good environment.”
Cherdsak Utha-Aron, Akara Resources’ general manager for sustainability, who was present at the hearing, told the AP afterward that the company respects the court’s decision and that its legal team will discuss next steps. He declined to comment further.
These ‘polluter pays’ cases, where communities sue corporations over environmental damage, are becoming common in climate litigation, said Georgina Lloyd, an environmental law expert at the UN Environment Programme.
“Asia’s share of climate and environmental litigation is increasing,” Lloyd said. “We are seeing this trend increasing both in the volume of cases as well as the geographic scope of the jurisdiction.”
About 225 climate litigation cases are expected to be filed in 2024, according to the Grantham Research Institute, which tracks nearly 3,000 cases in 60 countries.
number of climate related cases Climate-sensitive regions such as Southeast AsiaWhat has happened Plagued by deadly extreme weather events Reyes of the Grantham Research Institute said it has caused billions of dollars in losses and is expected to increase.
Two watershed ‘polluter pays’ cases in Southeast Asia are taking a new legal approach in an effort to hold companies accountable for the “climate harm” they cause. Climate change -Cause of emissions, Reyes said.
leftovers of 2021 Super Typhoon Odette in the philippines Energy giant Shell sued in the United Kingdom last year on the grounds that Shell’s emissions greatly contributed to climate change and thus the intensity of hurricanes.
In 2025, a Swiss court also allowed a case to proceed that was filed by fishermen from Indonesia’s Pari Islands against the cement company Holcim over emissions that contribute to flooding and sea level rise that threaten their homes and livelihoods.
These two cases, as well as Thailand’s Chattree decision, are “a very poignant call to discussion on climate justice,” Reyes said.
Regardless of the compensation, Reyes said, “The fact that the court declared liability is a victory in and of itself. This can be translated to other jurisdictions and be used as a warning to other companies moving forward.”
___
The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from several private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. find api standards A list of philanthropies to work with, supporters and funded coverage areas ap.org.
