Update log
- 4 November 2026: Added the statute box with Thai, English and French text and checked the page against the official text
Suing twice in Thailand over the same dispute is not just frowned upon: it is barred, and the bar is applied strictly. Thai courts will dismiss a second case that re-opens an issue already decided between the same parties, even when the second claim is dressed up as something new. Supreme Court decision 833/2569, a consumer case published in September 2026, is a clean example: an insurance company that had lost, paid a 16.2 million baht judgment, and then sued the other side for a 100,000 baht deductible under the very same policy.
It lost again, and this time it lost on procedure. For anyone litigating in Thailand (a landlord, a condo buyer, an employee, an insured driver), the lesson is that you get one shot at a dispute. Everything you want from it has to be in the first case.
Table of Contents
Suing Twice in Thailand: The Rule in Plain English
Thai civil procedure contains a family of rules designed to stop the same fight being run twice. The central one for this case is section 144 of the Civil Procedure Code, which prohibits further proceedings on a case or an issue that a court has already decided. Its text speaks of the court that gave the decision, but the Supreme Court applies it to a fresh lawsuit between the same parties that would require the same issue to be decided again, as it did in this case. Once a court has ruled, that ruling is the answer; a party cannot ask for a second one.
The rationale is not merely administrative tidiness. A party who could keep re-filing would be able to grind an opponent down through repetition, and a losing party could shop for a friendlier bench. So the rule cuts both ways: it protects the winner from harassment and it protects the loser from an endless series of follow-up claims.
Where expats get caught is the assumption that a new legal label makes a new case. It does not. The court looks at the substance (the same parties, the same transaction, the same underlying obligation) and not at how the claim has been renamed. Our overview of the Thai legal system explains the wider procedural picture.
The law behind this page
English
Section 144
Once a court has decided a case or an issue, the same court cannot conduct further proceedings on that same matter, subject to listed exceptions. The exceptions include correcting minor errors, new trials after an ex parte decision, appeals, cases returned for re-decision, and execution of the judgment.
Full text
When any court has given a judgment or an order deciding a case or any issue in a case, it is prohibited to conduct proceedings in that court relating to the case or the issue that has been decided, except where the case falls under the provisions of this Code on: (1) the correction of a minor error or other minor slip under Section 143; (2) a new trial of a case that was heard and decided ex parte under Section 209, and a case where documents have been lost or damaged under Section 53; (3) the filing, acceptance, or non-acceptance of an appeal or further appeal under Sections 229 and 247, and the taking of provisional measures during the filing of an appeal or further appeal under Section 254 final paragraph; (4) the return of a case by the Supreme Court or the appeal court to a lower court that heard and decided the case, for it to give judgment anew or to hear and give judgment anew under Section 243; (5) execution of a judgment or order under Section 271. This shall not preclude enforcement under the provisions of Sections 16 and 240 concerning proceedings conducted by another court so appointed.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 148
Once a judgment is final, the same parties cannot sue each other again on an issue already decided on the same grounds. There are three exceptions: proceedings to execute the judgment, provisional measures that can be varied, and dismissals that expressly leave the plaintiff free to refile.
Full text
In a case in which a judgment or order has become final, the same parties are prohibited from bringing suit against each other again on an issue that has been decided on the same grounds, except in the following cases: (1) where it is a proceeding at the stage of executing a judgment or order of the court; (2) where the judgment or order has fixed a provisional measure that is subject to being amended, changed, or revoked according to the circumstances; (3) where the judgment or order dismissed the complaint without prejudicing the plaintiff's right to file the complaint anew, in the same court or in another court, subject to the provisions of law on limitation.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 173
Once a complaint is filed, the court issues a summons and the plaintiff must request service within seven days. From filing, the case is pending, which means the plaintiff cannot file the same matter again in any court, and a later change such as the defendant moving does not remove the court's jurisdiction.
Full text
When the court has received the complaint, the court shall issue a summons to serve a copy of the complaint on the defendant so that the defendant may defend the case; and within seven days from the day of filing the complaint, the plaintiff shall request the official to serve that summons. From the time the complaint has been filed, the case is pending, and the effects of this are: (1) the plaintiff is prohibited from filing a complaint on the same matter with the same court or with another court; and (2) if a change occurs in the circumstances relating to the filing of the case at the court having jurisdiction over it, such as a change in the defendant's domicile, such change does not deprive the court that accepted the case of its power to try and finally decide it.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 180
A request to amend a pleading must be filed by motion before the settlement-of-issues hearing, or at least seven days before evidence is taken if there is no such hearing. Late requests are allowed only for good cause, for matters of public order, or to fix minor errors.
Full text
An amendment of a complaint or answer that a party has already submitted to the court shall be made by a motion filed with the court before the day of the settlement of issues, or not less than seven days before the day of taking evidence where there is no settlement of issues, unless there is reasonable cause preventing the motion from being filed before that time, or the amendment sought concerns public order, or it is the correction of a minor error or a minor slip.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 7 Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551
Full text
Proceedings in consumer cases shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the regulations of the President of the Supreme Court under section 6. Where there is no such provision or regulation, the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code shall apply mutatis mutandis.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 30 Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551
Full text
If, after a final judgment has been given in a consumer case, another consumer case is brought against the same business operator in which the facts in dispute are the same as in the earlier case and have already been decided by the court in the earlier case, the court in the later case may order that the facts on that issue be deemed settled as in the earlier case without the taking of evidence; unless the court considers that the facts in the earlier case are not sufficient for deciding the case, or in order to give the disadvantaged party an opportunity to contest the case, in which event the court has power to call evidence of its own motion or to permit the parties to adduce additional evidence as it thinks fit.
ThaiLawOnline translation
ไทย
มาตรา 144
ข้อความเต็ม
เมื่อศาลใดมีคำพิพากษา หรือคำสั่งวินิจฉัยชี้ขาดคดีหรือในประเด็นข้อใดแห่งคดีแล้ว ห้ามมิให้ดำเนินกระบวนพิจารณาในศาลนั้นอันเกี่ยวกับคดีหรือประเด็นที่ได้วินิจฉัยชี้ขาดแล้วนั้น เว้นแต่กรณีจะอยู่ภายใต้บังคับบทบัญญัติแห่งประมวลกฎหมายนี้ว่าด้วย (๑) การแก้ไขข้อผิดพลาดเล็กน้อยหรือข้อผิดหลงเล็กน้อยอื่น ๆ ตามมาตรา ๑๔๓ (๒) การพิจารณาใหม่แห่งคดีซึ่งได้พิจารณาและชี้ขาดตัดสินไปฝ่ายเดียว ตามมาตรา ๒๐๙ และคดีที่เอกสารได้สูญหายหรือบุบสลายตามมาตรา ๕๓ (๓) การยื่น การยอมรับ หรือไม่ยอมรับ ซึ่งอุทธรณ์หรือฎีกาตามมาตรา ๒๒๙ และ ๒๔๗ และการดำเนินวิธีบังคับชั่วคราวในระหว่างการยื่นอุทธรณ์ หรือฎีกาตามมาตรา ๒๕๔ วรรคสุดท้าย (๔) การที่ศาลฎีกาหรือศาลอุทธรณ์ส่งคดีคืนไปยังศาลล่างที่ได้พิจารณาและชี้ขาดตัดสินคดีนั้น เพื่อให้พิพากษาใหม่หรือพิจารณาและพิพากษาใหม่ตามมาตรา ๒๔๓ (๕) การบังคับคดีตามคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งตามมาตรา ๒๗๑ทั้งนี้ ไม่เป็นการตัดสิทธิในอันที่จะบังคับตามบทบัญญัติแห่งมาตรา ๑๖ และ ๒๔๐ ว่าด้วยการดำเนินกระบวนพิจารณาโดยศาลอื่นแต่งตั้ง
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 148
ข้อความเต็ม
คดีที่ได้มีคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งถึงที่สุดแล้ว ห้ามมิให้คู่ความเดียวกันรื้อร้องฟ้องกันอีก ในประเด็นที่ได้วินิจฉัยโดยอาศัยเหตุอย่างเดียวกัน เว้นแต่ในกรณีต่อไปนี้ (๑) เมื่อเป็นกระบวนพิจารณาชั้นบังคับคดีตามคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งของศาล (๒) เมื่อคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งได้กำหนดวิธีการชั่วคราวให้อยู่ภายในบังคับที่จะแก้ไขเปลี่ยนแปลงหรือยกเลิกเสียได้ตามพฤติการณ์ (๓) เมื่อคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งนั้นให้ยกคำฟ้องเสียโดยไม่ตัดสิทธิโจทก์ที่จะนำคำฟ้องมายื่นใหม่ ในศาลเดียวกันหรือในศาลอื่น ภายใต้บังคับแห่งบทบัญญัติของกฎหมายว่าด้วยอายุความ
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 173
ข้อความเต็ม
เมื่อศาลได้รับคำฟ้องแล้ว ให้ศาลออกหมายส่งสำเนาคำฟ้องให้แก่จำเลยเพื่อแก้คดี และภายในกำหนดเจ็ดวันนับแต่วันยื่นคำฟ้อง ให้โจทก์ร้องขอต่อพนักงานเจ้าหน้าที่เพื่อให้ส่งหมายนั้น นับแต่เวลาที่ได้ยื่นคำฟ้องแล้ว คดีนั้นอยู่ในระหว่างพิจารณา และผลแห่งการนี้ (๑) ห้ามไม่ให้โจทก์ยื่นคำฟ้องเรื่องเดียวกันนั้นต่อศาลเดียวกัน หรือต่อศาลอื่นและ (๒) ถ้ามีเหตุเปลี่ยนแปลงเกิดขึ้นในพฤติการณ์อันเกี่ยวด้วยการยื่นฟ้องคดีต่อศาลที่มีเขตศาลเหนือคดีนั้น เช่นการเปลี่ยนแปลงภูมิลำเนาของจำเลย การเปลี่ยนแปลงเช่นว่านี้หาตัดอำนาจศาลที่รับฟ้องคดีไว้ในอันที่จะพิจารณาและชี้ขาดตัดสินคดีนั้นไม่
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 180
ข้อความเต็ม
การแก้ไขคำฟ้องหรือคำให้การที่คู่ความเสนอต่อศาลไว้แล้ว ให้ทำเป็นคำร้องยื่นต่อศาลก่อนวันชี้สองสถาน หรือก่อนวันสืบพยานไม่น้อยกว่าเจ็ดวัน ในกรณีที่ไม่มีการชี้สองสถาน เว้นแต่มีเหตุอันสมควรที่ไม่อาจยื่นคำร้องได้ก่อนนั้นหรือเป็นการขอแก้ไขในเรื่องที่เกี่ยวกับความสงบเรียบร้อยของประชาชน หรือเป็นการแก้ไขข้อผิดพลาดเล็กน้อยหรือข้อผิดหลงเล็กน้อย
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 7 พระราชบัญญัติวิธีพิจารณาคดีผู้บริโภค พ.ศ. 2551
ข้อความเต็ม
กระบวนพิจารณาคดีผู้บริโภคให้เป็นไปตามบทบัญญัติแห่งพระราชบัญญัตินี้และข้อกำหนดของประธานศาลฎีกาตามมาตรา ๖ ในกรณีที่ไม่มีบทบัญญัติและข้อกำหนดดังกล่าว ให้นำบทบัญญัติแห่งประมวลกฎหมายวิธีพิจารณาความแพ่งมาใช้บังคับโดยอนุโลม
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 30 พระราชบัญญัติวิธีพิจารณาคดีผู้บริโภค พ.ศ. 2551
ข้อความเต็ม
ถ้าภายหลังที่ได้มีคำพิพากษาถึงที่สุดในคดีผู้บริโภคแล้ว ปรากฏว่ามีการฟ้องผู้ประกอบธุรกิจรายเดียวกันเป็นคดีผู้บริโภคอีกโดยข้อเท็จจริงที่พิพาทเป็นอย่างเดียวกับคดีก่อนและศาลในคดีก่อนได้วินิจฉัยไว้แล้ว ศาลในคดีหลังอาจมีคำสั่งให้ถือว่าข้อเท็จจริงในประเด็นนั้นเป็นอันยุติเช่นเดียวกับคดีก่อนโดยไม่ต้องสืบพยานหลักฐาน เว้นแต่ศาลเห็นว่าข้อเท็จจริงในคดีก่อนนั้นยังไม่เพียงพอแก่การวินิจฉัยชี้ขาดคดี หรือเพื่อให้โอกาสแก่คู่ความที่เสียเปรียบต่อสู้คดี ศาลมีอำนาจเรียกพยานหลักฐานมาสืบเองหรืออนุญาตให้คู่ความนำพยานหลักฐานมาสืบเพิ่มเติมตามที่เห็นสมควรก็ได้
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
Français
Article 144
Lorsqu'un tribunal a rendu un jugement ou une ordonnance tranchant l'affaire ou une question litigieuse, aucune procédure ne peut plus être menée devant lui sur ce qui a été tranché, sauf dans les cas prévus par le Code concernant: (1) la rectification d'erreurs ou omissions mineures (art. 143); (2) le réexamen d'une affaire jugée par défaut (art. 209) et des affaires dont les pièces ont été perdues ou détruites (art. 53); (3) le dépôt, l'admission ou le refus d'un appel ou pourvoi (art. 229 et 247) et les mesures provisoires pendant l'appel ou le pourvoi (art. 254, dernier alinéa); (4) le renvoi par la Cour suprême ou la cour d'appel pour nouveau jugement, ou nouvel examen et jugement (art. 243); (5) l'exécution du jugement ou de l'ordonnance (art. 271). Les articles 16 et 240, sur la procédure menée par un autre tribunal désigné, restent applicables.
résumé non officiel
Article 148
Lorsqu'une affaire a fait l'objet d'un jugement ou d'une ordonnance définitifs, les mêmes parties ne peuvent de nouveau agir en justice sur une question tranchée pour la même cause, sauf: (1) dans la procédure d'exécution du jugement ou de l'ordonnance; (2) lorsque le jugement ou l'ordonnance a fixé une mesure provisoire susceptible d'être modifiée ou annulée selon les circonstances; (3) lorsque la demande a été rejetée sans préjudice du droit du demandeur de la réintroduire devant le même tribunal ou un autre, sous réserve des règles de prescription.
résumé non officiel
Article 173
Après réception de la demande, le tribunal délivre une citation pour transmettre copie de la demande au défendeur afin qu'il y réponde; dans les sept jours du dépôt, le demandeur doit demander à l'agent compétent de faire signifier cette citation. Dès le dépôt, l'affaire est pendante, avec pour effets: (1) le demandeur ne peut introduire la même demande devant le même tribunal ou un autre; (2) un changement des circonstances déterminant la compétence territoriale, tel qu'un changement de domicile du défendeur, ne prive pas le tribunal saisi de sa compétence pour juger l'affaire.
résumé non officiel
Article 180
La modification d'une demande ou de conclusions en défense déjà déposées se fait par requête au tribunal avant l'audience de fixation des points litigieux ou, à défaut d'une telle audience, au moins sept jours avant l'audience d'administration des preuves, sauf motif légitime ayant empêché un dépôt antérieur, modification touchant à l'ordre public ou rectification d'erreurs ou omissions mineures.
résumé non officiel
Article 7 Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551
La procédure des affaires de consommation est régie par la présente loi et par les règlements du président de la Cour suprême pris en vertu de l'article 6. À défaut de telles dispositions, le Code de procédure civile s'applique par analogie.
résumé non officiel
Article 30 Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551
Si, après un jugement définitif dans une affaire de consommation, une nouvelle action de consommation est intentée contre le même professionnel sur des faits litigieux identiques déjà tranchés dans la première affaire, le tribunal saisi peut ordonner que ces faits soient tenus pour établis, sans administration des preuves. S'il estime toutefois ces faits insuffisants pour statuer, ou pour permettre à la partie désavantagée de se défendre, il peut ordonner d'office l'administration de preuves ou autoriser les parties à produire des preuves complémentaires.
résumé non officiel
Supreme Court decisions
- 3772/2565 (2022): Father May Re-File Paternity Claim if Prior Case Ended in Settlement Rather Than Adjudication
Sources
- Civil Procedure Code, Office of the Council of State, retrieved 31 October 2026
- Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551, retrieved 4 November 2026
- deka.supremecourt.or.th, Supreme Court of Thailand decisions database (copy held in our library), retrieved 19 February 2026
Dika 833/2569: The Insurer Who Came Back for the Deductible
The dispute began with a motor insurance policy. On 8 March 2557 the insured vehicle hit a tree, caught fire and was a total loss. The insured claimed 16,200,000 baht in benefits. The insurer refused to pay.
The insured sued in the South Bangkok Civil Court. The insurer defended on the ground that the policy was voidable. The court awarded the full 16,200,000 baht plus interest, the Court of Appeal affirmed, the Supreme Court affirmed again in Dika 911/2563, and the insurer paid the judgment.
Then the insurer filed a fresh case against the insured, this time seeking 100,000 baht, the deductible under the same policy, which the policy said the insured had to reimburse within seven days of written demand once the insurer had covered it. Technically it was a different sum of money and a different clause. Substantively it was the same policy, the same accident and the same parties.
The trial court dismissed the second case, the Court of Appeal Region 1 (Consumer Division) affirmed, and the Supreme Court’s Consumer Division upheld the dismissal as prohibited duplicate proceedings. The insurer had argued that its claim to the deductible did not even exist until it had paid under the first judgment, and that it could not have pleaded it in the first case while arguing that the policy was voidable. The Court was not persuaded: the new claim arose from the same breach of the same policy, so the issue it raised was contained in the issue already decided, namely whether the insurer had to pay under that policy. Reframing the claim as recovery of a deductible did not change that.
| First case | Second case | |
|---|---|---|
| Parties | Insured v insurer | Insurer v insured (reversed) |
| Policy | Same motor policy | Same motor policy |
| Event | Fire following collision, 8 March 2557 | Same event |
| Claim | 16,200,000 baht in benefits | 100,000 baht deductible |
| Outcome | Insured wins, judgment paid | Dismissed as duplicate proceedings |
Three Different Bars on a Second Case
Thai law uses three separate provisions, and they are easy to confuse. Knowing which one applies tells you whether your second case is dead, merely premature, or fine.
| Provision | Thai name | What it stops |
|---|---|---|
| CPC s.144 | damnoen krabuan phicharana sam | A court re-deciding an issue it has already decided between the same parties |
| CPC s.148 | fong sam | A fresh action on a cause of action already finally judged between the same parties |
| CPC s.173 para 2(1) | fong son | A second action filed while the first is still pending |
Dika 833/2569 turned on section 144 paragraph 1. The first case was over and paid; what the insurer was trying to do was have a court decide, a second time, what this policy required of whom. That is squarely what section 144 forbids.
What is not barred
A genuinely different cause of action between the same parties is not caught. A second accident under the same policy, a later breach of a continuing contract, a new period of unpaid rent: all of these can be sued on separately, because the facts giving rise to them are new. The test is whether the issue the court would have to decide is one it has already decided, not whether the parties are the same.
Consumer Cases Get No Exemption
This was a consumer case, heard throughout in the consumer divisions, and the special procedure made no difference. Section 7 of the Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551 applies the Civil Procedure Code to consumer cases so far as that Act does not provide otherwise, and nothing in it lifts the bar on re-litigating between the same parties. Its section 30, which lets a later court treat facts already found against the same business as settled, works for other consumers and does not help a party re-run its own case.
Consumer procedure in Thailand is genuinely friendlier in other respects: a consumer who sues is exempt from court fees (section 18, though the exemption does not cover costs ordered against a losing consumer in the final judgment, and the court can order fees paid for an unreasonable claim), the court can call evidence on its own initiative (section 33), and on facts about how a product was made, designed or composed, or how a service was provided, which the court considers to be within the business’s special knowledge, the burden of proof falls on the business (section 29). None of that is a licence to run the same dispute twice. Expats who bring consumer claims about vehicles, condominium units, insurance or financial products should assume every ordinary procedural bar applies unless a specific provision lifts it.
The Mistake Expats Make: Splitting One Dispute
The recurring pattern in our own files is a client who wins something and then realises they forgot to claim something else. A tenant recovers the deposit and then wants the moving costs. A condo buyer gets the price back and then wants the interest and the lost rental income. An employee wins severance and then wants the unpaid bonus.
Sometimes those are separate causes of action and a second case is competent. Often they are not: they are heads of loss flowing from the one breach the court has already ruled on, and a second case will be struck out. The difference is not obvious from the outside, which is exactly why it has to be thought about before the first claim is filed rather than after it succeeds.
- Plead every head of loss. Damages, interest, costs, consequential loss: all of it, in the first statement of claim.
- Plead in the alternative. If you are unsure whether the right claim is breach of contract or unjust enrichment, plead both rather than saving one.
- Do not hold something back as leverage. A claim you withhold for negotiation may be a claim you have lost.
- Amend rather than re-file. Section 180 lets you amend, but generally only before the issues are settled or, where there is no settlement of issues, at least seven days before witnesses are heard. Once judgment is final you cannot.
- Watch the reverse direction too. As Dika 833/2569 shows, a defendant who later becomes a claimant is caught by the same rule.
How to Keep Your Second Case Alive
If you are already past the first judgment and want to bring a further claim, the analysis is narrow but not hopeless. Work through it with a lawyer before filing, because a struck-out case still costs you time and fees and can damage your position in any related matter.
- Identify the issue actually decided. Read the judgment, not your memory of it. Section 144 bites on issues the court determined.
- Ask whether your new claim needs that issue re-decided. If the court would have to revisit what the contract required, expect dismissal.
- Look for genuinely new facts. A later breach, a new event, a different period. New facts can support a new case; a new argument about old facts cannot.
- Check whether enforcement is the real answer. If the judgment already covers what you want but you have not been paid, the route is execution, not a fresh suit.
- Consider a counterclaim next time. Where you are the defendant and have your own claim on the same transaction, raise it in the answer, provided it is connected to the plaintiff’s claim.
Decision 833/2569 is indexed on the community database deka.in.th and, when the official service is reachable, in the Supreme Court’s own Deka database. For an orientation to what litigation in Thailand actually involves, see what to know before you go to court in Thailand, and our page on Supreme Court appeal processes covers how appeals work.
Last reviewed: 30 September 2026. Checked against the full Thai text of Dika 833/2569 read to the disposition, and against the Thai text of Civil Procedure Code sections 144, 148, 173 and 180 and Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551 sections 7, 18, 29 and 33. Corrected: the Supreme Court upheld a dismissal ordered by the lower courts rather than dismissing the case itself; added the insurer’s rejected argument, the first-case history (Dika 911/2563), the consumer-only scope of the fee exemption and the section 180 amendment deadline. The general examples of split claims are illustrations, not decided cases.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sue the same person twice in Thailand?
Yes, but only on a different cause of action. You cannot ask a court to decide again an issue that has already been determined between you and that person; CPC section 144 prohibits it, as Dika 833/2569 confirms.
What is the difference between fong sam and fong son?
Fong sam (CPC section 148) bars a new action on a cause already finally judged. Fong son (CPC section 173 paragraph 2(1)) bars a second action filed while the first is still pending. Section 144 separately bars a court from re-deciding an issue it has already decided.
Does the consumer court have different rules on duplicate cases?
No. Section 7 of the Consumer Case Procedure Act B.E. 2551 applies the Civil Procedure Code to consumer cases except where that Act provides otherwise, and nothing in it lifts the bar on re-litigating between the same parties.
I forgot to claim interest in my first case. Can I file again?
Usually not. Interest and other heads of loss flowing from the same breach are generally treated as part of the issue already decided. The time to add them is by amendment early in the first case (section 180 sets the deadline, generally before the issues are settled), not by a second case.
What if the other side breaches the same contract again?
A fresh breach is a fresh cause of action and can be sued on separately. The bar applies to re-deciding what has already been decided, not to new facts arising after the first judgment.
What if I won but have not been paid?
That is an enforcement problem, not a new claim. You apply for execution of the existing judgment through the court of first instance that tried the case rather than filing a second case for the same money.
About the author. This article was written and reviewed by Sébastien Brousseau, LL.B., B.Sc. Sebastien has been based in Thailand since 2004 and has run ThaiLawOnline since 2006, advising expats on Thai litigation, property and contract disputes. If you are weighing up a second claim, or deciding what to put in a first one, contact ThaiLawOnline before you file.
Disclaimer: this article is general information about Thai law and is not legal advice. Whether a particular second claim is barred depends on the precise issues decided in the first case. Please consult a qualified professional about your own situation before acting.
Thai Law Updates, free by email
Plain-English updates on Thai law changes that affect foreigners: property, visas, marriage, business and wills. One short email a month from a firm practicing since 2006. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.