Journal of Transport and Maritime Law

An Analysis of Regulatory Overlaps and Gaps in UAV-Based Air Transport Innovation within the Biophilic City Paradigm

2026-06-22T16:54:24+07:00

Urban development in the 21st century is transitioning towards the "Biophilic City" paradigm, emphasizing the reduction of road infrastructure to integrate green spaces into urban environments. A strategic innovation facilitating this vision is "Commercial Drone Delivery." However, the deployment of this innovation in Thailand faces significant obstacles rooted in the existing legal architecture. This academic article aims to analyze jurisprudential overlaps and gaps through a systematic framework comprising law, facts, analysis, and uncertainty. The study reveals that, regarding legal compliance, operators are strictly bound by the Air Navigation Act B.E. 2497 (1954) and notifications issued by the Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand (CAAT), which designate no-fly zones and impose strict security regulations. While legal exemptions exist for state agencies, there is potential for carbon tax avoidance under the Draft Climate Change Act and green finance opportunities under Thailand Taxonomy Phase 2, significant regulatory uncertainties remain. The structural analysis highlights three principal areas of regulatory uncertainty: the tension between low-altitude airspace management (lacking U-Space "Drone Corridors") and rigid security laws; unresolved civil liability issues regarding artificial intelligence in air carriage contracts, which raise questions regarding the applicability of Supreme Court Judgment No. 5136/2547 to incidents caused by autonomous AI-driven systems; and incidental data privacy risks under the PDPA caused by navigational sensors. The article proposes that the state expedite the enactment of specific airspace management legislation and modernize civil liability rules to position Thailand as a sustainable logistics hub firmly governed by the rule of law.

Case Review of T-134/25 (LOT Polish Airlines)

2026-04-28T14:14:58+07:00

An order issued by the Air Traffic Controller may qualify as extraordinary circumstances if such order meets the requirements of the principle of extraordinary circumstances within the definitions from the precedents of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Though in the consideration, whether an order may constitute extraordinary circumstances. or not, it does not take the underlying reason of the issued order as part of the consideration. The order itself does not have to directly cause a delay of 3 hours. In the case where an order was only binding upon an earlier flight. But due to aircraft rotation prepared for the second flight to use the same aircraft after an earlier flight, which affects the awaiting flight to be delayed. Airlines may raise the defence of extraordinary circumstances if it can be proven that, an order issued by the Air Traffic Control that was binding upon the earlier flight has direct casual link to the delay of the subsequent flight to be exempted from an obligation to compensate passengers in delayed flight.

Case summary: SMT Global Logistics Limited V Georgian Airlines LLC

2026-02-27T19:07:35+07:00

Case summary; D. S.A. V. P. S.A.

2026-02-27T22:37:51+07:00

งานสัมมนาทางวิชาการ เรื่อง “ความเป็นไปได้ในการนำใบตราส่งอิเล็กทรอนิกส์มาใช้ในประเทศไทย : ปัญหาและอุปสรรค”

2026-06-22T13:46:50+07:00

ส่วนหน้า

2026-06-29T15:33:43+07:00