Article 47: Proving a power of attorney

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 4502/2565 (2022)

   Where there is no reasonable cause to suspect that a power of attorney is not genuine, it need not comply with the certification requirements of section 47 paragraph three, and no consular or embassy certification is required.

   The defendant produced no evidence to show that the plaintiff's power of attorney was not genuine, so there was no reasonable cause to suspect it. The Supreme Court held that the power of attorney therefore did not have to be made in accordance with section 47 paragraph three, and no Thai consul or embassy certification was needed. A separate argument that the attorney's authority was limited to cases below a stated value was addressed on its own facts.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 6616/2560 (2017)

   Section 47 is about the court's power over a power of attorney or similar document where there is doubt or a party's motion showing reasonable cause; it does not mean that a document lacking notarisation is invalid.

   The Supreme Court explained that section 47, applied through the intellectual property and international trade court statute, concerns the court's power over a power of attorney or similar document where the court has doubt, or the other party files a motion showing reasonable cause to suspect authenticity. In those cases the court may order the party to submit the document by the method in paragraph three. It does not follow that a document without notarisation, or without compliance with paragraph three, is thereby not genuine.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.