Article 196 — No Separate Appeal of Interlocutory Orders
Texte légal (original thaï)
คำสั่งระหว่างพิจารณาที่ไม่ทำให้คดีเสร็จสำนวน ห้ามมิให้อุทธรณ์คำสั่งนั้นจนกว่าจะมีคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งในประเด็นสำคัญและมีอุทธรณ์คำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งนั้นด้วย
traduction anglaise
An order made during the course of the trial that does not dispose of the case shall not be appealed until a judgment or order on the principal issue has been rendered, and only together with an appeal against that judgment or order.
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 196 prevents piecemeal appeals by deferring any challenge to a non-dispositive order until final judgment, when it must be raised together with an appeal against that judgment. The key test is whether the order disposes of the case (or a severable charge): a genuine interlocutory order, such as a refusal to postpone the hearing, is caught by the bar, whereas an order that finally disposes of a distinct charge (for example dismissing one count) is not interlocutory and may be appealed on its own. An appeal that attacks only the interlocutory order without also contesting the judgment is barred. This provision operates alongside Section 198 bis on challenging a refusal to accept an appeal.
Pourquoi cela est important en pratique
If the court makes a ruling you dislike during trial, note your objection but do not rush to appeal it: under Section 196 you must wait, then appeal it together with the final judgment. Crucially, your appeal must also challenge the judgment itself; an appeal aimed only at the interim order will be thrown out. The exception is an order that finally disposes of a separate charge, which you can appeal immediately. Whether a given order is truly interlocutory can be contested, so if a mid-trial ruling seriously prejudices you, get advice through an consultation en ligne avec un avocat thaïlandais on how and when to raise it.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 728/2566 (2023)
An order refusing a postponement is an interlocutory order that does not dispose of the case; an appeal against it that does not also contest the judgment is barred under Section 196.
The Court of Appeal found that the trial court's refusal to postpone the case was an interlocutory order not disposing of the case, and that the plaintiff's appeal nowhere contested the trial court's judgment. Because the plaintiff did not appeal the judgment as well, the appeal was barred under Section 196 and rightly not considered.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4456/2564 (2021)
An order that finally disposes of a distinct charge is not an interlocutory order, so a party may appeal it on its own and is not barred by Section 196.
The trial court's order disposing of the rape charge under Section 39(2), a charge severable from the others, was held to have finished that issue and so was not an interlocutory order. The prosecutor therefore had the right to appeal it on its own without being barred by Section 196, and the Court of Appeal Region 6 properly ruled on it.
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
Can I appeal a court order made during a criminal trial right away?
Not if it is an interlocutory order that does not dispose of the case. Under Section 196 you must wait for the final judgment and appeal the order together with that judgment.
Are there orders during trial that can be appealed immediately?
Yes. An order that finally disposes of a separate charge is not interlocutory, so it can be appealed on its own without waiting, and is not barred by Section 196.