Section 1480: Revoking a juristic act done without the other spouse's consent

Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section

1. Supreme Court Judgment No. 156/2561 (2018)

   Where a deed records a transfer of marital property as a gift, the parties may prove by witnesses what the transaction really was, since that is proof of true intention and the origin of the contract, not evidence altering a document. If the transfer was in fact for consideration and the third party acted in good faith and paid value, the other spouse cannot have it revoked under section 1480 paragraph one.

   The plaintiff sued to revoke the registration by which defendant 1 transferred the whole disputed plot to defendant 2 as a gift. The defendants proved that defendant 1 had in fact sold it to defendant 2 for 400,000 baht but declared it a gift to reduce the fees. The Court held they were entitled to prove the true intention behind the transaction and the origin of the contract, which was not evidence altering a document prohibited by Civil Procedure Code section 94(b). The transfer was therefore one for consideration, and since defendant 2 was a third party who acted in good faith and paid value, the plaintiff could not have it revoked under section 1480 paragraph one.

   Read the full decision (deka.in.th)

2. 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.

   Read the full decision (deka.in.th)

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