Section 1564: Parents' duty to maintain and educate their children

Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section

1. Supreme Court Judgment No. 7345/2560 (2017)

   A child right to maintenance running from the date of birth does not come from section 1564 but from the amendment to section 1557 in force from 8 March 2008, which makes legitimation take effect from the date of birth; arrears from birth may therefore be claimed in the same action as the application to have the child recognised. Section 1564 makes the parents joint debtors for maintenance, but it does not follow that they must contribute equal amounts: section 1598/38 requires the court to weigh the payer ability, the recipient station and the circumstances of the case, and section 1598/39 allows the sum to be varied later. Fixing maintenance is a question of public order, so the Supreme Court may fix the proper amount even where no party has appealed on it, and that is not going beyond the claim.

   A child sued his father for maintenance of 10,000 baht a month from birth to the date of filing, 1,720,000 baht in all. The father pleaded limitation under section 193/33(4); the first court rejected it, and his attempt to raise section 1547 instead on appeal was refused because it had not been pleaded below - limitation is a matter of public order but must still be raised as an issue in the first court. On the merits the Supreme Court held that the amendment to section 1557 in force from 8 March 2008 makes legitimation effective from the date of birth, so the child right to maintenance runs from birth and the Court of Appeal was right to award from birth to the date of filing rather than from final judgment. It further held that although section 1564 makes the parents joint debtors, the Court of Appeal was wrong to halve the award to 685,000 baht simply to equalise their shares: section 1598/38 requires the payer ability, the recipient station and the circumstances to be weighed, and section 1598/39 permits later variation. Fixing maintenance being a matter of public order, the Court restored the first court award of 1,370,000 baht even though the child had not appealed on the point.

   Read the full decision (deka.in.th)

2. Supreme Court Judgment No. 248/2542 (1999)

   The duty to maintain a child is independent of property division and cannot be set off against a parent's marital property share.

   A parent's share in marital property and the duty to maintain a child are distinct obligations; the marital property share is not offset against the maintenance obligation.

   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.