Section 193/14 — Interruption of prescription
Statutory text (Thai original)
(๒) หากคดีนั้นได้มีคำพิพากษาถึงที่สุดให้ยกคำฟ้อง หรือคดีเสร็จไปโดยการจำหน่ายคดีเพราะเหตุถอนฟ้อง หรือทิ้งฟ้อง ให้ถือว่าอายุความไม่เคยสะดุดหยุดลงในกรณีที่คดีนั้นศาลไม่รับหรือคืนหรือให้ยกคำฟ้องเพราะเหตุคดีไม่อยู่ในอำนาจศาล หรือศาลให้ยกคำฟ้องโดยไม่ตัดสิทธิโจทก์ที่จะฟ้องใหม่ และปรากฏว่าอายุความครบกำหนดไปแล้วในระหว่างการพิจารณา หรือจะครบกำหนดภายในหกสิบวันนับแต่วันที่คำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งนั้นถึงที่สุด ให้เจ้าหนี้มีสิทธิฟ้องคดีเพื่อตั้งหลักฐานสิทธิเรียกร้องหรือเพื่อให้ชำระหนี้ภายในหกสิบวันนับแต่วันที่คำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งนั้นถึงที่สุด
Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State
English translation
Prescription is interrupted if: feedback (/form/1-samuiforsale-contact-form.html?tmpl=component) / (1) The debtor has acknowledged the claim towards the creditor by written acknowledgement, by part payment, payment of interest, giving security, or by any unequivocal act which implies the acknowledgment of the claim. (2) The creditor enters an action for the establishment of the claim or for requiring performance. (3) The creditor applies for receiving a debt to arbitration. (4) The creditor submits the dispute to arbitration. (5) The creditor does any act which brings an effect equivalent to entering an action.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 193/14 is part of Book 1 (General Principles) 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: part payment or a written acknowledgment restarts the limitation clock; document all such events carefully. For laypersons: if you make even a small payment on a debt, the time limit for the creditor to sue resets from that date.
Legislative history
Introduced as part of the comprehensive prescription reform in Book 1 of the CCC; no major subsequent amendment to this section.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4602/2562 (2019)
An official demand by the trustee in bankruptcy constitutes an act equivalent to filing suit, interrupting prescription under Section 193/14(5).
A written demand by the Official Receiver to the defendants to repay a debt constituted an act equivalent to filing suit under Section 193/14(5), causing prescription to be interrupted. The plaintiff who later purchased the claim was entitled to rely on that interruption.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 16836/2557 (2014)
An heir's payment of instalments under the deceased's hire-purchase agreement constitutes acknowledgment of the claim, interrupting prescription.
An heir who continued paying hire-purchase instalments within one year of the original debtor's death was held to have acknowledged the claim under Section 193/14(3), thereby interrupting prescription.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
Does making a partial payment on a debt interrupt prescription?
Yes. Under Section 193/14(1), a part payment is an acknowledgment of the claim that interrupts prescription. After interruption, the prescription period begins running again from zero.