Section 1480
Statutory text (Thai original)
แก้ไขเพิ่มเติมโดยพระราชบัญญัติแก้ไขเพิ่มเติมประมวลกฎหมายแพ่งและพาณิชย์ (ฉบับที่ ๑๐) พ.ศ. ๒๕๓๓ [164]
Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State
คำแปลภาษาอังกฤษ
In the management of the Sin Somros which has to be made jointly or has to obtain the consent from the other spouse under Section 1476, if either spouse has entered into any juristic act alone or without consent of the other, the latter may apply in Court for revoking such juristic act , unless it has been ratified by the other spouse, or the third person was at the time of entering into such juristic act, acting in good faith and make the counter-payment. The litigation for revocation of the juristic act by the Court under paragraph one cannot be made later than one year from the day when such cause as being the ground for the revocation is known, or later than ten years since the juristic act was done. feedback (/form/1-samuiforsale-contact-form.html?tmpl=component) /
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 1480 is part of Book 5 (Family) of the Thai Civil and Commercial Code. This entry is awaiting firm-authored commentary; the statutory text above is verbatim from the Office of the Council of State (OCS Krisdika) Thai source, with the English translation from the FAO/UN FAOLEX repository. Always rely on the Thai original for legal proceedings.
Why this matters in practice
For lawyers: a non-consenting spouse must act within one year of discovering the unauthorised act; missing the limitation period bars the voidance claim regardless of the ten-year outer limit. For clients: if you discover your spouse sold or donated marital property without your knowledge, consult a lawyer immediately — the one-year clock runs from the date you actually found out.
Legislative history
Section 1480 was consolidated from the former §§1476 and 1480 when Book 5 was revised. The Marriage Equality Act (No. 24, B.E. 2567), in force 22 Jan 2025, made gender-neutral amendments; both spouses now share identical rights to challenge or ratify such acts.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 156/2561 (2018)
A gratuitous unilateral transfer of Sin Somros to a third party is voidable; the transferee's good faith and payment of value are the decisive factors.
One spouse's unilateral transfer of marital property to a third party as a gift — not to the other spouse — was not a disposal 'jointly' and could be challenged; the court examined whether the transferee was a bona fide party for value to determine if the transfer was protected.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4071/2558 (2015)
Only a married person's share in a joint purchase constitutes Sin Somros; the co-owner's share is unaffected.
Where two persons jointly purchased land during marriage, only one spouse's share was Sin Somros; the co-purchaser's share was not affected by the marital property rules and the spouse could not claim the entire parcel as marital property.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.