“Summary of the Supreme Administrative Court Decision”, 25 Dec 2015

…In this case, the plaintiff wishes to bring the case against the defendant for 3 grounds which are: 1) the PPA between the EGAT and the Xayaburi Power Co., Ltd. is invalid; 2) the Procedure for Notification Prior Consultation and Agreement: PNPCA process including the legal compliance as provided by domestic laws has not yet been complied with; and 3) the approval of the cabinet and other defendants to sign the Xayaburi PPA is not legitimate…Given the fact from both parties, the Court found that information disclosure in the websites…was complete and met with the Thai Constitution…Also, the Electricity Generation Authority of Thailand and the Ministry of Energy did not fail to follow the cabinet’s resolution and the Constitution.  The Power Purchase Agreement was not regarded as a project or activity; therefore it was not necessary to conduct a study, evaluation and consultation.  In other word, the Electricity Generation Authority of Thailand had no responsibility…Lastly, the Court found that the Ministry of National Resources and Environment through the Department of Water Resources completely fulfilled its responsibility to conduct public consultations according to the PNPCA.  The Court, hereby, dismisses the case.