Article 163: Costs when a case ends by settlement
Statutory text (Thai original)
ถ้าคดีได้เสร็จเด็ดขาดลงโดยการตกลงหรือการประนีประนอมยอมความหรืออนุญาโตตุลาการ คู่ความแต่ละฝ่ายย่อมรับผิดในค่าฤชาธรรมเนียมในส่วนการดำเนินกระบวนพิจารณาของตน เว้นแต่คู่ความจะได้ตกลงกันไว้เป็นอย่างอื่น
English translation
If a case is finally concluded by agreement, by compromise, or by arbitration, each party shall be liable for the court costs relating to its own conduct of the proceedings, unless the parties have agreed otherwise.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified. Always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 163 sits in Part 2 on ultimate liability for costs and supplies a default rule for cases that never reach a merits judgment. Where a dispute is closed by agreement, compromise, or arbitration, there is no losing party against whom the court apportions costs, so each party simply absorbs the costs of its own proceedings. The rule is expressly subject to contrary agreement, so the parties are free to reallocate costs, including attorney fees, as part of their settlement terms. This complements Sections 161 and 167 on the court's power and duty to fix costs where a case is decided on the merits.
Why this matters in practice
If you are considering settling, remember that a compromise leaves each side carrying its own filing fees and lawyer costs unless the settlement document says otherwise. Negotiators should therefore write the costs allocation directly into the written settlement rather than leave it to this default. This makes a negotiated close through mediation or arbitration in Thailand attractive when both sides want to cap and control their cost exposure.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 1848/2516 (1973)
A settlement term making one party liable for the other's attorney fees is valid under Section 163; because it is an agreed term and not a court award to the winner, the parties may fix any amount and are not bound by the Table 6 attorney-fee scale.
The parties agreed that the defendant would be liable for court costs including attorney fees. The court held this agreement valid under Section 163, and that because it was an agreed allocation rather than a court award to the winning side, the parties could set any amount without following the statutory attorney-fee scale in Table 6.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5272/2539 (1996)
Section 163, which makes each party bear its own costs where a case is finally concluded by agreement, compromise or arbitration, does not reach the costs that arise at the execution stage. Ultimate liability for those costs, including the executing officer's fee where property other than money is seized but not sold, falls on the party who loses the case under Section 161 paragraph one, subject to the court's discretion.
The dispute was over who bears the executing officer's fee for property seized but not sold. The Supreme Court held that ultimate liability for that fee, like all costs, falls on the losing party under Section 161 paragraph one, while the court keeps a discretion to order any party to bear all or part of the costs, having regard to reasonable cause and good faith in the conduct of the case. Section 149, under which the party conducting a step pays for it, is expressly subject to that final-liability rule and does not decide the question.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 3 Supreme Court decisions (1973 to 1996)
Décisions de citation sélectionnées
- Decision 1848/2516 (1973)
- Decision 5272/2539 (1996)
- Décision 2595/2526 (1983)
Cette liste est sélectionnée automatiquement, en privilégiant les jugements qui reposent sur cet article plutôt que sur ceux qui se contentent de le citer lors du prononcé de la peine. Elle n'a pas encore été examinée par le cabinet.
Calculé sur l'ensemble du corpus de 83 652 décisions de la Cour suprême du cabinet, de 1921 à 2026. Le décompte est exhaustif ; la plage d'années indiquée élimine les valeurs aberrantes rares afin de refléter la répartition réelle des citations. Ces chiffres sont calculés par nos soins et ne constituent pas des statistiques officielles de la Cour. Comment nous les comptons et ce que nous avons mesuré
Foire aux questions
Qui paie les frais de justice lorsqu'une affaire est réglée à l'amiable ?
En vertu de l'article 163, lorsqu'une affaire se termine par accord, compromis ou arbitrage, chaque partie supporte les frais de justice de sa propre procédure, à moins que les parties n'aient convenu d'un partage différent.
Un accord peut-il contraindre une partie à prendre en charge les frais de justice de l'autre ?
Oui. L'article 163 permet aux parties de convenir d'autres modalités ; un compromis peut donc prévoir qu'une partie prenne en charge les frais de justice et les honoraires d'avocat de l'autre. Les tribunaux ont validé de tels accords.
Guides connexes sur ThaiLawOnline
Citer cette section
-
Citation simple
Civil Procedure Code, s. 163 (Thailand) -
Citation académique
Civil Procedure Code (Thailand), s. 163. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-163/ (accessed 1 septembre 2026). -
Citation thaïlandaise
ป.วิ.พ. มาตรา 163 -
Lien permanent
https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-163/ -
Intégrer sur votre site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-163/"><p>Si une affaire est définitivement réglée par accord, par compromis ou par arbitrage, chaque partie est responsable des frais de justice liés à sa propre conduite de la procédure, sauf convention contraire des parties.</p><footer>Civil Procedure Code, s. 163 (Thailand): <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-163/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.