Article 321: Court order compelling a third party to pay
Statutory text (Thai original)
ถ้าบุคคลภายนอกไม่ชำระหนี้ตามคำสั่งอายัดของศาลหรือเจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีตามมาตรา ๓๑๖ ให้เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีแจ้งให้เจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาทราบ ในกรณีเช่นว่านี้ เจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาอาจยื่นคำร้องต่อศาลให้บังคับบุคคลภายนอกนั้นปฏิบัติการชำระหนี้ตามที่เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีมีคำสั่งหรือชำระค่าสินไหมทดแทนเพื่อการไม่ชำระหนี้แก่เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีก็ได้ เมื่อศาลทำการไต่สวนแล้วถ้าเป็นที่พอใจว่าสิทธิเรียกร้องของลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษานั้นมีอยู่จริงและอาจบังคับได้ จะมีคำสั่งให้บุคคลภายนอกปฏิบัติการชำระหนี้ตามที่เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีมีคำสั่งหรือให้ชำระค่าสินไหมทดแทนตามจำนวนที่เห็นสมควรก็ได้ ถ้าบุคคลภายนอกนั้นมิได้ปฏิบัติตามคำสั่งของศาล เจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาอาจร้องขอให้ศาลบังคับคดีแก่บุคคลภายนอกนั้นเสมือนหนึ่งว่าเป็นลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาก็ได้
English translation
If the third party does not perform the obligation in accordance with the attachment order of the court or the execution officer under Section 316, the execution officer shall notify the judgment creditor. In such a case, the judgment creditor may file a motion with the court to compel that third party to perform the obligation as ordered by the execution officer, or to pay compensation for the non-performance to the execution officer. When the court has held an inquiry, if it is satisfied that the claim of the judgment debtor genuinely exists and is enforceable, it may order the third party to perform the obligation as ordered by the execution officer, or to pay compensation in such amount as it thinks fit. If that third party does not comply with the order of the court, the judgment creditor may apply to the court to enforce against that third party as though he were a judgment debtor.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified. Always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 321 opens Part 5 and provides the enforcement teeth behind an attachment of claims. Where the third party disregards an attachment order under Section 316, the execution officer informs the creditor, who may move the court to compel performance or to order compensation for the non-performance. The court holds an inquiry and acts only if satisfied that the debtor's claim genuinely exists and is enforceable, echoing Section 317, under which even a disputed claim may be attached but must be proven before payment is compelled. If the third party defies the court's order, it may be enforced against as though it were a judgment debtor. The provision was renumbered by the Civil Procedure Code Amendment Act (No. 30) B.E. 2560 (2017).
Why this matters in practice
This is the remedy when a bank, employer, or debtor's debtor simply ignores an attachment order. You cannot skip straight to enforcing against the third party: there must first be a valid attachment under Section 316, then a court inquiry that the claim genuinely exists, before the third party can be compelled or ordered to pay compensation and, ultimately, treated like a judgment debtor. Getting the sequence right matters, because courts reject petitions that jump the steps, which is a common pitfall a debt collection lawyer helps you avoid.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 227/2567 (2024)
A village fund set up under the National Village and Urban Community Fund Act B.E. 2547 is a public juristic person, so money it holds that came from state allocations and government subsidies is state property that cannot be seized or attached, under Civil and Commercial Code section 1307 and Section 301 (5). Money that members have deposited with the fund is not the judgment debtor's property either, so Sections 303 and 316 do not permit its attachment. Where the deposits were never attachable, there is no obligation that Section 321 can compel the third party to perform.
The judgment creditors asked the court to compel the bank, as the third party served with the attachment, to remit 289,000 baht from the defendant village fund's accounts or to pay that sum as compensation under Section 321. The Supreme Court held the money was never attachable: one account held state allocations and government subsidies, which are state property under Civil and Commercial Code section 1307 and outside execution under Section 301 (5), and the other held members' deposits, which are not the judgment debtor's property within Sections 303 and 316. It reversed the Court of Appeal's order that the bank pay and gave effect to the judgment of the court of first instance.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 1784/2563 (2020)
The Section 321 procedure to compel a third party to satisfy an attachment order presupposes that the debtor's claim has first been validly attached; seeking to compel the third party without first attaching the claim is an out-of-order proceeding.
The creditor asked the court, through the execution officer, to compel a province to comply with the officer's attachment order under Section 321 so it would become liable like a judgment debtor, without first attaching the debtor's claim. The Supreme Court treated this as skipping the required step of attaching the claim, an improperly conducted proceeding.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 5 Supreme Court decisions (1950 to 2024)
Décisions de citation sélectionnées
- Decision 1784/2563 (2020)
- Décision 227/2567 (2024)
- Decision 710/2493 (1950)
- Decision 18196/2557 (2014)
- Decision 5378/2544 (2001)
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
Que se passe-t-il si une banque ignore un ordre de saisie ?
En vertu de l'article 321, l'huissier de justice notifie le créancier, qui peut demander au tribunal de contraindre le tiers à payer ou à verser une indemnité. Si le tiers persiste dans son refus, des mesures d'exécution peuvent être prises à son encontre, comme s'il s'agissait du débiteur.
Un créancier peut-il engager directement une procédure de recouvrement contre un tiers ?
Non. Il doit d'abord y avoir une saisie conservatoire valide en vertu de l'article 316 et une enquête judiciaire confirmant l'existence et le caractère exécutoire de la créance ; les requêtes qui omettent ces étapes sont rejetées.
Guides connexes sur ThaiLawOnline
Citer cette section
-
Citation simple
Civil Procedure Code, s. 321 (Thailand) -
Citation académique
Civil Procedure Code (Thailand), s. 321. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-321/ (accessed 1 septembre 2026). -
Citation thaïlandaise
ป.วิ.พ. มาตรา 321 -
Lien permanent
https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-321/ -
Intégrer sur votre site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-321/"><p>If the third party does not perform the obligation in accordance with the attachment order of the court or the execution officer under Section 316, the execution officer shall notify the judgment creditor. In such a case, the judgment creditor may file a motion with…</p><footer>Civil Procedure Code, s. 321 (Thailand): <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-321/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.