Section 102 — Delegating and sending evidence taking
Statutory text (Thai original)
ให้ศาลที่พิจารณาคดีเป็นผู้สืบพยานหลักฐาน โดยจะสืบในศาลหรือนอกศาล ณ ที่ใด ๆ ก็ได้ แล้วแต่ศาลจะสั่งตามที่เห็นสมควรตามความจำเป็นแห่งสภาพของพยานหลักฐานนั้นแต่ถ้าศาลที่พิจารณาคดีเห็นเป็นการจำเป็น ให้มีอำนาจมอบให้ผู้พิพากษาคนใดคนหนึ่งในศาลนั้น หรือตั้งให้ศาลอื่นสืบพยานหลักฐานแทนได้ ให้ผู้พิพากษาที่รับมอบหรือศาลที่ได้รับแต่งตั้งนั้นมีอำนาจและหน้าที่เช่นเดียวกับศาลที่พิจารณาคดีรวมทั้งอำนาจที่จะมอบให้ผู้พิพากษาคนใดคนหนึ่งในศาลนั้นหรือตั้งศาลอื่นให้ทำการสืบพยานหลักฐานแทนต่อไปด้วยถ้าศาลที่พิจารณาคดีได้แต่งตั้งให้ศาลอื่นสืบพยานแทน คู่ความฝ่ายใดฝ่ายหนึ่ง จะแถลงต่อศาลที่พิจารณาคดีว่า ตนมีความจำนงจะไปฟังการพิจารณาก็ได้ ในกรณีเช่นนี้ให้ศาลที่ได้รับแต่งตั้งแจ้งวันกำหนดสืบพยานหลักฐานให้ผู้ขอทราบล่วงหน้าอย่างน้อยไม่ต่ำกว่าเจ็ดวัน คู่ความที่ไปฟังการพิจารณานั้นชอบที่จะใช้สิทธิได้เสมือนหนึ่งว่ากระบวนพิจารณานั้นได้ดำเนินในศาลที่พิจารณาคดีให้ส่งสำเนาคำฟ้องและคำให้การพร้อมด้วยเอกสารและหลักฐานอื่น ๆ อันจำเป็นเพื่อสืบพยานหลักฐานไปยังศาลที่ได้รับแต่งตั้งดังกล่าวแล้ว ถ้าคู่ความฝ่ายที่อ้างอิงพยานหลักฐานนั้นมิได้แถลงความจำนงที่จะไปฟังการพิจารณา ก็ให้แจ้งไปให้ศาลที่ได้รับแต่งตั้งทราบข้อประเด็นที่จะสืบ เมื่อได้สืบพยานหลักฐานเสร็จแล้ว ให้เป็นหน้าที่ของศาลที่รับแต่งตั้งจะต้องส่งรายงานที่จำเป็นและเอกสารอื่น ๆ ทั้งหมดอันเกี่ยวข้องในการสืบพยานหลักฐานไปยังศาลที่พิจารณาคดี
English translation
The court trying the case shall be the one to take the evidence, whether within the court or outside the court at any place, as the court orders as it thinks fit according to the necessity arising from the nature of that evidence. However, if the court trying the case sees it as necessary, it shall have the power to entrust any one of its judges, or to appoint another court, to take the evidence in its stead. The judge so entrusted or the court so appointed shall have the same powers and duties as the court trying the case, including the power to entrust any one of its judges, or to appoint another court, to continue taking the evidence in its stead.
If the court trying the case has appointed another court to take evidence in its stead, either party may declare to the court trying the case that it intends to attend the hearing. In such a case, the appointed court shall notify the applicant of the date fixed for taking the evidence at least seven days in advance. A party attending the hearing is entitled to exercise its rights as if the proceeding were being conducted in the court trying the case.
A copy of the plaint and the answer, together with the documents and other evidence necessary for taking the evidence, shall be sent to the appointed court. If the party relying on that evidence has not declared an intention to attend the hearing, the issues to be taken shall be notified to the appointed court. When the taking of evidence is completed, it shall be the duty of the appointed court to send the necessary reports and all other documents relating to the taking of the evidence to the court trying the case.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 102 fixes who takes the evidence and how it may be delegated. The default is that the trial court takes evidence itself, in or outside the courtroom, as the nature of the evidence demands. Where necessary, it may entrust the task to one of its own judges or appoint another court (commonly to take a witness who is in another jurisdiction), and the entrusted judge or appointed court holds the same powers, including the power to sub-delegate. Paragraphs two and three protect the parties' participation: a party may declare an intention to attend, is entitled to at least seven days' notice, and exercises its rights as if the proceeding were in the trial court, while the case papers go out and the completed record comes back. Whether delegation is necessary is a matter for the trial court's discretion.
Why this matters in practice
If your witness lives far from the trial court or has moved to another province, Section 102 is the route to have that court take the testimony, saving travel while keeping your rights intact. Always declare in time that you wish to attend the delegated hearing, otherwise you may only be able to send written issues; and diary the seven-day notice. Bear in mind that delegation is discretionary, the trial court can refuse or later revoke it if it is not truly necessary, so do not treat a transfer of witness taking as automatic.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2078/2542 (1999)
A court appointed to take evidence in the trial court's stead under Section 102 paragraph two itself has power to appoint yet another court to take that evidence, for example where the witness has moved into the latter court's area, and the plaintiff need not amend its witness list to do so.
The trial court had appointed the Civil Court to take evidence in its stead. Because the witness had moved to serve at a hospital within another court's area, the Supreme Court held that the appointed court could in turn appoint that other court to take the evidence, under Section 102 paragraph two, without the plaintiff having to amend its witness list.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2607/2526 (1983)
Whether to take particular evidence in or out of court, or to send the issues to another court, is within the court's power under Section 102 according to the necessity arising from the nature of the evidence; the court may decline, and may revoke an order previously granted, where it finds the step not yet necessary.
After first ordering the issues sent to take a defendant's evidence in the United States, the trial court revoked that order and required the defendant to testify at court instead. The Supreme Court held this was within the court's power under Section 102, since it is for the court to decide, according to necessity, whether evidence is taken in or out of court or by another court, and it may revoke a permission already granted.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3007/2525 (1982)
Section 102 is only a provision prescribing the method of sending the issues to take evidence at another court where the trial court sees it as appropriate and necessary; it does not confer a right on a party to demand such delegation.
The Supreme Court characterised Section 102 as merely setting out the procedure for sending issues to be taken at another court when the trial court considers it appropriate and necessary, confirming that resort to that procedure depends on the trial court's assessment rather than a party's demand.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
Can a court have another court take a witness for it?
Yes. Under Section 102, where necessary the trial court may appoint another court, or entrust one of its own judges, to take the evidence in its stead, and that court can sub-delegate too.
Can I attend when another court takes my witness?
Yes. You may declare to the trial court that you intend to attend; the appointed court must give at least seven days' notice, and you exercise your rights as if the proceeding were in the trial court.
Must the court always send a witness to another court?
No. Delegation under Section 102 rests on the trial court's discretion where it is necessary; the court may refuse, and may revoke an order to send issues if it finds it is not yet necessary.