Article 148 — Res judicata, bar on repeat suits
Texte légal (original thaï)
คดีที่ได้มีคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งถึงที่สุดแล้ว ห้ามมิให้คู่ความเดียวกันรื้อร้องฟ้องกันอีก ในประเด็นที่ได้วินิจฉัยโดยอาศัยเหตุอย่างเดียวกัน เว้นแต่ในกรณีต่อไปนี้
(๑) เมื่อเป็นกระบวนพิจารณาชั้นบังคับคดีตามคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งของศาล
(๒) เมื่อคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งได้กำหนดวิธีการชั่วคราวให้อยู่ภายในบังคับที่จะแก้ไขเปลี่ยนแปลงหรือยกเลิกเสียได้ตามพฤติการณ์
(๓) เมื่อคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งนั้นให้ยกคำฟ้องเสียโดยไม่ตัดสิทธิโจทก์ที่จะนำคำฟ้องมายื่นใหม่ ในศาลเดียวกันหรือในศาลอื่น ภายใต้บังคับแห่งบทบัญญัติของกฎหมายว่าด้วยอายุความ
traduction anglaise
In a case in which a judgment or order has become final, the same parties are prohibited from bringing suit against each other again on an issue that has been decided on the same grounds, except in the following cases:
(1) where it is a proceeding at the stage of executing a judgment or order of the court;
(2) where the judgment or order has fixed a provisional measure that is subject to being amended, changed, or revoked according to the circumstances;
(3) where the judgment or order dismissed the complaint without prejudicing the plaintiff's right to file the complaint anew, in the same court or in another court, subject to the provisions of law on limitation.
Cette traduction anglaise est fournie à titre indicatif uniquement et n'a pas encore été vérifiée de manière définitive ; référez-vous toujours à l'original thaï.
Annotation de l'entreprise
Section 148 is the Code's res judicata rule (ฟ้องซ้ำ). Once a judgment or order is final, the same parties may not sue each other again on an issue decided on the same grounds, which prevents endless relitigation of settled disputes. Three exceptions are listed: proceedings in the execution stage, provisional measures that by their nature can be varied, and dismissals expressly made without prejudice to refiling, subject to limitation. The bar applies only where the parties, the issue, and the grounds are the same, so a suit by a person who was not a party to the earlier case, or on genuinely different grounds, is not caught. It differs from Section 144, which bars re-proceeding within the same litigation rather than a fresh suit.
Pourquoi cela est important en pratique
Res judicata means that once you have litigated an issue to a final judgment against a particular opponent, you generally cannot sue them again on the same issue and grounds, so the first case must be run as if it is your only chance. The bar is precise: it needs the same parties, the same issue, and the same grounds, which is why a claim by someone who was not a party before, or on a truly different basis, can still proceed. Before refiling anything close to an earlier case, check carefully whether it would be barred as a repeat suit. If you are unsure, a consultation with a Thai lawyer can assess whether res judicata applies.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 883/2567 (2024)
A suit is not a barred repeat suit under Section 148 where the plaintiff was not a party to the earlier case, since the bar requires the same parties.
The plaintiff had not been a party to the earlier criminal case in which compensation was claimed. The court held that the plaintiff's suit against the first defendant was therefore not a matter of the same parties re-suing on a decided issue, so it was neither a barred repeat suit under Section 148 nor a re-proceeding under Section 144.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1858/2567 (2024)
Where the parties are the same and an earlier case on the same issue has become final, a fresh suit on that issue is a barred repeat suit under Section 148.
The court held that where the parties in the earlier and present cases were the same and the earlier case had become final, the plaintiff was barred from suing again on the same issue. Otherwise a party who lost on a wager agreement could keep refiling, so the new suit was a barred repeat suit under Section 148.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4838/2566 (2023)
A later application to establish ownership over the same land as an earlier case is a re-litigation of a decided issue on the same grounds, and is barred under Section 148 paragraph one.
The applicant again sought to establish ownership of the disputed land by adverse possession, as in an earlier case. The court held this re-litigated a decided issue on the same grounds and was a barred repeat application under Section 148 paragraph one.
Décisions sélectionnées avec numéros de dossier vérifiés dans la base de données de la Cour suprême. Les versions anglaises sont des traductions éditoriales réalisées par le cabinet à des fins d'étude.
Foire aux questions
What is a repeat suit under Section 148?
It is a fresh suit between the same parties on an issue that a final judgment already decided on the same grounds. Section 148 prohibits such suits, subject to three exceptions.
When is a new suit not barred as a repeat suit?
If the parties differ, or the issue or grounds are genuinely different, the bar does not apply. Section 148 also excepts execution proceedings, variable provisional measures, and dismissals that allow refiling.