Article 37: Continuous hearing until judgment
Statutory text (Thai original)
ให้ศาลดำเนินการนั่งพิจารณาคดีติดต่อกันไปเท่าที่สามารถจะทำได้โดยไม่ต้องเลื่อนจนกว่าจะเสร็จการพิจารณาและพิพากษาคดี
English translation
The court shall conduct the hearing of a case continuously, so far as it is able to do so, without postponement, until the trial is concluded and judgment is given.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified. Always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 37 states the principle of continuous trial that governs Chapter 4 on court hearings. It requires the court to sit continuously, as far as practicable, until the case is concluded and judgment is rendered, and it sets the baseline against which the postponement provisions in sections 38 to 45 operate as controlled exceptions. In practice it is read together with section 133, under which the court gives judgment on the day the hearing is completed. When a party has no more witnesses to call and the court closes the taking of evidence, the case is treated as concluded and the court may proceed to decide it.
Why this matters in practice
For litigants this means you should be fully prepared on each hearing date: witnesses ready, documents organised, and counsel briefed, because the court is not obliged to stretch the trial over convenient future dates. If your side runs out of evidence or fails to appear when it is your turn, the court can treat the case as concluded and move straight to judgment. Serious civil litigation rewards early preparation, and this is a good reason to engage a lawyer well before the first hearing rather than the week of trial. See our guide on going to court in Thailand.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5923/2545 (2002)
Sections 37 and 133 require the court to sit continuously until the hearing is concluded and to give judgment on the day proceedings are completed.
The last party to present evidence, the fourth defendant, had no witnesses to call, so the trial court closed the taking of evidence and treated the case as concluded. On the same day, 19 December, the court noted the case as concluded, awaited judgment, and delivered its judgment. The Supreme Court held that proceeding in this way, and rendering judgment on the day the hearing ended, complied with sections 37 and 133.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 3182/2545 (2002)
When the court closes an inquiry because the applicant, though duly notified, fails to appear, the matter is treated as concluded under sections 37 and 133 and the court may dismiss the motion.
The defendant knew of the date fixed to inquire into a motion to proceed as an indigent party on appeal but did not attend. The trial court ordered the inquiry closed and dismissed the motion. The Supreme Court held that this was a proper proceeding under sections 37 and 133: once the inquiry was closed the matter was concluded, so the court could dismiss the defendant's motion.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 6 Supreme Court decisions (1973 to 2015)
Décisions de citation sélectionnées
- Decision 5923/2545 (2002)
- Decision 3182/2545 (2002)
- Decision 7083/2544 (2001)
- Decision 5722/2541 (1998)
- Decision 5836/2558 (2015)
- Decision 1632-1633/2516 (1973)
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
Le tribunal est-il tenu de conclure un procès civil en une seule séance ?
L'article 37 exige que le tribunal instruise l'affaire sans interruption, dans la mesure du possible, jusqu'à la conclusion du procès et le prononcé du jugement. Il n'impose pas que tout se déroule en une seule journée, mais il déconseille de scinder le procès en plusieurs audiences distinctes.
Que se passe-t-il si je n'ai plus de témoins à appeler ?
Si vous n'avez plus de témoins et que le tribunal achève l'audition des preuves, l'affaire est considérée comme close pour vous et le tribunal peut prononcer son jugement. C'est pourquoi une préparation minutieuse avant l'audience est essentielle.
Guides connexes sur ThaiLawOnline
Citer cette section
-
Citation simple
Civil Procedure Code, s. 37 (Thailand) -
Citation académique
Civil Procedure Code (Thailand), s. 37. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-37/ (accessed 1 septembre 2026). -
Citation thaïlandaise
ป.วิ.พ. มาตรา 37 -
Lien permanent
https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-37/ -
Intégrer sur votre site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-37/"><p>Le tribunal doit tenir l'audience sans interruption, dans la mesure du possible, jusqu'à la conclusion du procès et le prononcé du jugement.</p><footer>Civil Procedure Code, s. 37 (Thailand): <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-civil-procedure-code/section-37/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.