Article 80 — Proof of service
Texte légal (original thaï)
การส่งคำคู่ความหรือเอกสารโดยเจ้าพนักงานศาลหรือทางเจ้าพนักงานศาลนั้น ให้เจ้าพนักงานศาลส่งใบรับลงลายมือชื่อคู่ความ หรือผู้รับคำคู่ความหรือเอกสาร หรือส่งรายงานการส่งคำคู่ความหรือเอกสารลงลายมือชื่อเจ้าพนักงานศาลต่อศาล แล้วแต่กรณี เพื่อรวมไว้ในสำนวนความใบรับหรือรายงานนั้นต้องลงข้อความให้ปรากฏแน่ชัดถึงตัวบุคคลและรายการต่อไปนี้
(๑) ชื่อเจ้าพนักงานผู้ส่งหมาย และชื่อผู้รับหมาย ถ้าหากมี
(๒) วิธีส่ง วัน เดือน ปี และเวลาที่ส่งรายงานนั้นต้องลงวันเดือนปี และลงลายมือชื่อของเจ้าพนักงานผู้ทำรายงานใบรับนั้นจะทำโดยวิธีจดลงไว้ที่ต้นฉบับซึ่งยื่นต่อศาลก็ได้
traduction anglaise
For the service of a pleading or document by a court officer or through a court officer, the court officer shall submit to the court a receipt signed by the party or by the person who received the pleading or document, or a report on the service of the pleading or document signed by the court officer, as the case may be, to be kept in the case file. The receipt or report must state clearly the identity of the person and the following particulars:
(1) the name of the officer who served the writ, and the name of the person who received the writ, if any;
(2) the method of service, and the day, month, year, and time of service.
That report must be dated and signed by the officer who made it. The receipt may be made by noting it on the original that was submitted to the court.
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 80 closes Title 4 by requiring a written record of every officer service, kept in the case file as the evidence that service happened and how. The record is either a receipt signed by the recipient or a report signed by the officer, and it must show the officer, the recipient if any, and the method, date, time of service. These particulars are not a formality: a report that omits a required item, such as the time of service under item (2), can be held defective, undermining a service that otherwise looked complete. The section is the evidentiary anchor for the service rules in Sections 74 to 79.
Pourquoi cela est important en pratique
The service report is often the decisive document when service is disputed, so read it closely. Missing details, such as no time of service or an unclear posting method, can be enough to challenge whether service was proper and to reopen a default. If you suspect you were never validly served, obtain the return of service from the file and check it against Section 80's requirements. A avocat thaïlandais can spot defects that support a motion to set the proceedings aside.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 8852/2551 (2008)
Section 80(2) requires the service report to state the method, day, month, year, and time of service; a report that fails to record the time of service does not comply with the section, bearing on whether the service was lawful.
Defendant 5 argued that the return of service for the auction notice did not record the time of service, contrary to Section 80(2), and that posting with easily torn scotch tape was improper. The issue framed by the court was whether the service of the notice of the auction date on defendant 5 was lawful, given these claimed defects in the record and manner of posting.
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
How is service of a document proved in a Thai court?
Under Section 80 the court officer files a receipt signed by the recipient or a service report signed by the officer, kept in the case file, stating who served and received it and the method, date, and time of service.
Is service invalid if the report omits the time?
It can be. Section 80(2) requires the method, date, and time of service. A report that omits the time may be held not to comply, which can be used to challenge whether service was proper.