Article 203 — No appeal against strike-out; refiling
Texte légal (original thaï)
ห้ามมิให้โจทก์อุทธรณ์คำสั่งจำหน่ายคดีตามมาตรา ๒๐๑ และมาตรา ๒๐๒ แต่ภายใต้บังคับบทบัญญัติแห่งกฎหมายว่าด้วยอายุความ คำสั่งเช่นว่านี้ไม่ตัดสิทธิโจทก์ที่จะเสนอคำฟ้องของตนใหม่
traduction anglaise
The plaintiff is prohibited from appealing against an order striking out the case under Section 201 and Section 202. However, subject to the provisions of the law on prescription, such an order does not deprive the plaintiff of the right to submit the plaint anew.
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 203 completes the default framework of Sections 201 and 202 by closing off the appeal route while leaving the door open to a fresh action. It reflects a policy choice: rather than litigate over the strike-out order, the plaintiff who wishes to continue must simply sue again. The critical qualifier is the phrase subject to the law on prescription. Read with Civil and Commercial Code Section 193/17, the Supreme Court treats a strike-out for the plaintiff's default like an abandonment, so the original filing is deemed never to have interrupted prescription and the fresh action must fall within the ordinary limitation period counted as if no earlier suit existed.
Pourquoi cela est important en pratique
The trap in Section 203 is prescription. Because the earlier suit is treated as never having interrupted the limitation clock, a plaintiff who let a case be struck out may find the refiled claim time-barred even though the first action was filed on time. For debt claims especially, verify the remaining limitation period before relying on the right to refile, and move quickly. See our debt collection service if you need to reassert a money claim after a strike-out.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 6751/2561 (2018)
Section 203 bars an appeal against a strike-out under Section 202 but preserves the right to refile subject to prescription; because the strike-out for default is not a true withdrawal, the plaintiff gains no benefit from the earlier filing and prescription is deemed never to have stopped.
Addressing whether the refiled debt claim was time-barred, the Supreme Court applied Section 203: the strike-out for the creditor's default did not bar a fresh action, but because the earlier suit was deemed never to have interrupted prescription, the new claim had to fall within the limitation period, which it did not.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1609/2560 (2017)
Although Section 203 does not by its terms forbid a request for a retrial, a plaintiff can only seek a retrial where an ex parte trial has been held; once the case is struck out for the plaintiff's default, the sole remedy is to refile within the limitation period.
After the case was struck out for the plaintiff's default under Section 202, the Supreme Court explained that no ex parte trial had taken place, so a retrial could not be requested; under Section 203 the plaintiff's only route was to file a fresh action in time.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 9922/2558 (2015)
Where a case is struck out because the plaintiff defaulted of appearance, prescription is deemed never to have been interrupted; although Section 203 leaves the plaintiff free to refile, the new action must still be brought within the limitation period.
The plaintiff's earlier civil case had been struck out for default. Counting from when that case became final to the date of the new suit, more than ten years had passed. The Supreme Court held that under Section 203 the refiled claim was barred by prescription and upheld dismissal.
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
Can I appeal if my case is struck out for default?
No. Section 203 bars an appeal against a strike-out order made under Section 201 or Section 202. The remedy is to file the claim again rather than appeal.
Is there a time limit on refiling after a strike-out?
The right to refile is subject to the law on prescription. Because the first filing is treated as never having interrupted prescription, the new action must be brought within the ordinary limitation period, so a delayed refiling can be time-barred.