Thailand Law Forum Thailand Law Forum  
 
Feature Articles :

History of Cannabis
  and Anti-Marijuana
  Laws in Thailand



Thailand’s Notable
  Criminal Extradition
  Cases


Guide for Tourists
  to Laws in Thailand



Neither Free nor Fair:
  Burma’s Sham Elections



Sex Laws in Thailand:
  Part 1



Renewable Energy
  in Thailand



Transsexuals and
  Thai Law



Foreign Mafia in
  Thailand


 

Supreme Court Opinion Summaries (3/2549)

 
Note concerning Thailand Supreme court opinions: Thailand is a civil law jurisdiction that also has elements of the common law system. Accordingly, the principle law sources are acts, statutes and regulations. However, published Supreme court decisions are an important part of the legal development of Thailand and are frequently used as a secondary authority. (Summaries sponsored by Chaninat & Leeds)

 

3/2549 Thailand Supreme Court Opinion 111 (No. 2539) 2006
Chareonrattanakul vs. Srikloy

Re:
Unregistered Land Contracts

According to the first paragraph of Section 1299 of the Civil and Commercial Code when a proprietary interest is transferred without registering the transfer with the appropriate officials it may not be used to make a claim against a person not party to the contract.  However it is not invalid rather it applies to the parties of the agreement.  Although the agreement between the two plaintiffs and defendant was not registered as the defendant stated in his plaint to the Supreme Court it is still applicable to the two plaintiffs and defendant.

 

 

3/2549 Thailand Supreme Court Opinion 141 (No. 2869) 2006
Arkarnsongkrao Bank vs. Siam Lago Group., Co. Ltd.

Re:
Mortgage Agreement; Resubmission of Plaint

In a previous case the plaintiff sued Por and Wing Lieutenant Commander Por. to pay their debt and enforce a mortgage agreement at the Court of First Instance (Red Case Number 16255/2536) and the case was concluded. According to the judgment of Red Case 5957/2537 auctioned goods purchased by the defendant were seized and the Thailand property was sold by auction.  The Plaintiff had mortgage rights on the property purchased by the defendant.  The Plaintiff has a right to enforce the mortgage agreement with the defendant however the defendant only purchased the Thailand real estate and did not enter into the mortgage agreement with the plaintiff therefore the plaintiff's rights to enforce the mortgage agreement are not the same as those with the original owner.  The plaintiff can not use the judgment ordered in the last case against the defendant in this case because the defendant was not a party in the last case.  The last case and the current case are separate issues.  This is not a case where the same two parties are disputing over an already settled incident.  Therefore the Plaintiff's complaint is not a resubmission of the same plaint as in Red Case Number 16255/2536 of the Court of First Instance.  The plaintiff is therefore not barred by Section 148 of Civil Procedure Code.

The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court only on the grounds of legal procedure. A Judge of the Supreme Court has determined that the plaintiff is not resubmitting the same plaint. The case must be returned to the Court of First Instance for consideration and judgment on the other issues in the case.  The court fees for this cases of this type can not be calculated however the plaintiff must pay a court entrance fee of 200 baht according to Section 1(2 Kor) of the Schedule of the Civil Procedure Code.


 

3/2549 Thailand Supreme Court Opinion 161 (No. 3192) 2006
Samerchit v. Phaporn

Re: Double Marriage Registration

Ms. Samerchit (Plaintiff) and Mr.Watthana registered their marriage in 1966.  In 1970 Mr.Watthana registered his the Thailand marriage to Mrs.Thanaphan and then registered their the Thailand divorce in 1993. Afterwards Mr. Watthana registered his marriage to Ms.Phaporn (Defendant) in 1998.  At the time of his death, Mr. Watthana had 2 marriage certificates. The first certificate is lawful and the latter one is void according to sections 1452 and 1495 of the Civil and Commercial Code. Both Ms.Samerchit and Ms.Phaporn wish to be the heirs of Mr. Watthana but only Ms. Samerchit has the right to an inheritance.


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     

Chaninat & Leeds offered support in translating Supreme Court case law. Chaninat & Leeds is a Thailand Law Firm practicing family and business law. Chaninat & Leeds specializes in Thailand criminal defense lawyer. Chaninat & Leeds is managed by an American attorney who specializes in immigration with a focus on family visas including prenuptial agreement Thailand. For any submissions, comments, or questions, e-mail the Thailand Law Forum at: info@fourladiesforum.com Please read our Disclaimer.

 

© Copyright Thailand Law Forum, All Rights Reserved
(except where the work is the individual works of the authors as noted)