Article 218: Impossibility caused by the debtor

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 22/2536 (1993)

   A paid depositary that cannot return deposited goods due to its own employee's misconduct is liable in damages; the impossibility falls within the depositary's responsibility.

   A paid depositary's employee secretly removed the plaintiff's deposited goods from the warehouse to evade customs duty, causing the goods to be seized as evidence in criminal proceedings. The Court held this was not force majeure but the depositary's own failure to exercise the care of a reasonable person; the depositary was therefore liable under section 218 to pay the value of the goods it could not return.

   Lire la décision complète (deka.in.th)

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5671/2534 (1991)

   Where a debtor's personal undertaking to transfer third-party property becomes impossible because of that third party's refusal, the creditor's remedy shifts to damages under section 218.

   A divorce settlement required the defendant to transfer land held in the name of a company he managed. The Court held that the settlement bound him personally, not the company, and that the company's shareholders' resolution blocking the transfer meant performance had become impossible. Because the impossibility arose from circumstances connected to the defendant's own undertaking, the court could not compel specific performance but the section 218 damages remedy remained available.

   Lire la décision complète (deka.in.th)

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.