Article 226: Interlocutory orders and delayed appeal
Statutory text (Thai original)
ก่อนศาลชั้นต้นได้มีคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งชี้ขาดตัดสินคดี ถ้าศาลนั้นได้มีคำสั่งอย่างใดอย่างหนึ่งนอกจากที่ระบุไว้ในมาตรา ๒๒๗ และ ๒๒๘
(๑) ห้ามมิให้อุทธรณ์คำสั่งนั้นในระหว่างพิจารณา
(๒) ถ้าคู่ความฝ่ายใดโต้แย้งคำสั่งใด ให้ศาลจดข้อโต้แย้งนั้นลงไว้ในรายงาน คู่ความที่โต้แย้งชอบที่จะอุทธรณ์คำสั่งได้ภายในกำหนดหนึ่งเดือนนับแต่วันที่ศาลได้มีคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งชี้ขาดตัดสินคดีนั้นเป็นต้นไปเพื่อประโยชน์แห่งมาตรานี้ ไม่ว่าศาลจะได้มีคำสั่งให้รับคำฟ้องไว้แล้วหรือไม่ ให้ถือว่าคำสั่งอย่างใดอย่างหนึ่งของศาลนับตั้งแต่มีการยื่นคำฟ้องต่อศาลนอกจากที่ระบุไว้ในมาตรา ๒๒๗ และ ๒๒๘ เป็นคำสั่งระหว่างพิจารณา
English translation
Before the court of first instance has rendered a judgment or an order finally deciding the case, if that court has issued any order other than those specified in Sections 227 and 228:
(1) no appeal against that order shall be allowed during the trial;
(2) if any party objects to any order, the court shall record that objection in the record; the party who objected is entitled to appeal the order within one month from the date on which the court renders the judgment or the order finally deciding the case.
For the purpose of this section, whether or not the court has already ordered acceptance of the complaint, any order of the court from the time the complaint is filed with the court, other than those specified in Sections 227 and 228, shall be deemed an interlocutory order.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified. Always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 226 is the interlocutory-order rule that prevents piecemeal appeals from fragmenting and delaying a trial. Any order made before final judgment, except those specifically listed in Sections 227 and 228, cannot be appealed while the case proceeds. Instead, the objecting party must have the objection recorded and may appeal only after the final judgment or dispositive order, within one month. The deeming clause is broad: essentially every order from the filing of the complaint onward, other than the Section 227 and 228 categories, is interlocutory, so the default is no immediate appeal. The recorded objection is the crucial step, because failing to lodge it forfeits the right to challenge the order later.
Why this matters in practice
The single most important habit under Section 226 is to object on the record the moment the court makes an adverse interlocutory order, even a routine one; without that recorded objection your right to appeal it later is gone. You then appeal it together with, or after, the final judgment, within one month. Do not try to appeal an interlocutory order immediately, because it will be rejected as premature. Careful trial management protects your appeal rights; see our guide to going to court in Thailand.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 4289/2565 (2022)
An order allowing a defendant to file and accepting an amended answer is an interlocutory order under Section 226; the objecting party may appeal it only within one month after the final judgment, not immediately.
When the court accepted the defendant's amended answer raising limitation, the plaintiff objected. The Supreme Court held that order was an interlocutory order under Section 226 (with Section 7 of the Consumer Case Procedure Act), so it could be appealed only within one month from the final judgment, not during the trial.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 3748/2565 (2022)
An order revoking the acceptance of a claim and allowing a new third-party claim is not an order refusing or returning a pleading appealable under Section 228, but an interlocutory order barred from immediate appeal under Section 226(1), which the party must object to under Section 226(2) to preserve the right.
The Supreme Court held the order in question was not a Section 228 order refusing or returning a pleading, but an interlocutory order under Section 226(1). To preserve any appeal, the claimant had to make a recorded objection under Section 226(2). It agreed with the Court of Appeal and dismissed the dika.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 3202/2559 (2016)
Where a party recorded its objection to an interlocutory order (here shortly after issues were framed), it preserves the right to raise that point on appeal under Section 226(2).
Because the plaintiff had recorded its objection to the interlocutory order the day after the court framed the issues, the Supreme Court held it retained the right to appeal that point under Section 226(2) (applied with the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court Act), and proceeded to consider the appeal.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 372 Supreme Court decisions (1948 to 2022)
Décisions de citation sélectionnées
- Décision 3748/2565 (2022)
- Decision 10300/2559 (2016)
- Decision 12434/2558 (2015)
- Decision 7206/2558 (2015)
- Decision 4474/2558 (2015)
- Decision 1427/2558 (2015)
- Decision 18330/2557 (2014)
- Decision 17023/2557 (2014)
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.
Le plus souvent cité aux côtés de
- Article 228 56
- Article 227 48
- Article 247 40
- Article 249 37
- Article 18 36
- Article 24 33
Sections qui apparaissent le plus souvent dans les mêmes jugements que celui-ci. Le chiffre correspond au nombre de décisions.
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
Peut-on faire appel d'une ordonnance interlocutoire pendant le procès ?
Non. Conformément à l'article 226, les ordonnances rendues en cours de procès (autres que celles visées aux articles 227 et 228) ne sont pas susceptibles d'appel pendant l'instance. Vous devez formuler vos objections au dossier et interjeter appel dans un délai d'un mois à compter du jugement définitif.
Que se passe-t-il si je ne m'oppose pas à une ordonnance interlocutoire ?
Vous perdez le droit d'interjeter appel. L'article 226(2) exige que l'objection soit consignée au procès; sans objection consignée, vous ne pourrez pas contester cette ordonnance en appel.
Guides connexes sur ThaiLawOnline
Citer cette section
-
Citation simple
Civil Procedure Code, s. 226 (Thailand) -
Citation académique
Civil Procedure Code (Thailand), s. 226. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-226/ (accessed 1 septembre 2026). -
Citation thaïlandaise
ป.วิ.พ. มาตรา 226 -
Lien permanent
https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-226/ -
Intégrer sur votre site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-226/"><p>Before the court of first instance has rendered a judgment or an order finally deciding the case, if that court has issued any order other than those specified in Sections 227 and 228: (1) no appeal against that order shall be allowed during the trial;…</p><footer>Civil Procedure Code, s. 226 (Thailand): <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-226/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.