Section 164 — Costs after a deposit into court
Statutory text (Thai original)
ในกรณีที่วางเงินต่อศาลตามมาตรา ๑๓๕, ๑๓๖ นั้น จำเลยไม่ต้องรับผิดในค่าฤชาธรรมเนียมแห่งจำนวนเงินที่วางนั้นอันเกิดขึ้นภายหลังถ้าโจทย์ยอมรับเงินที่วางต่อศาลเป็นการพอใจเต็มตามที่เรียกร้องแล้ว จำเลยต้องเป็นผู้รับผิดในค่าฤชาธรรมเนียมถ้าโจทย์ยอมรับเงินที่วางต่อศาลนั้นเป็นการพอใจเพียงส่วนหนึ่งแห่งจำนวนเงินที่เรียกร้อง และดำเนินคดีต่อไป จำเลยต้องรับผิดในค่าฤชาธรรมเนียม เว้นแต่ศาลจะได้พิพากษาให้โจทก์แพ้คดี ในกรณีเช่นนี้โจทก์ต้องเป็นผู้รับผิดในค่าฤชาธรรมเนียมทั้งสิ้นอันเกิดแต่การที่ตนไม่ยอมรับเงินที่วางต่อศาลเป็นการพอใจตามที่เรียกร้อง
English translation
In the case of depositing money with the court under Sections 135 and 136, the defendant shall not be liable for the court costs, in respect of the amount deposited, that arise afterwards. If the plaintiff accepts the money deposited with the court as full satisfaction of the amount claimed, the defendant shall be liable for the court costs. If the plaintiff accepts the money deposited with the court as satisfaction of only part of the amount claimed and continues the case, the defendant shall be liable for the court costs, unless the court gives judgment against the plaintiff; in such case the plaintiff shall be liable for all court costs arising from the plaintiff's refusal to accept the deposited money as satisfaction of the claim.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 164 links the deposit mechanism in Sections 135 and 136 to the ultimate allocation of costs. It shields the defendant from costs accruing later on the deposited sum and then sorts liability by the plaintiff's response. If the plaintiff accepts the deposit as full satisfaction, the defendant bears costs; if the plaintiff accepts only part and presses on, the defendant still bears costs unless the plaintiff loses, in which case the plaintiff bears all costs generated by refusing a sufficient deposit. The provision rewards a realistic deposit and penalises a plaintiff who needlessly prolongs litigation over money already tendered.
Why this matters in practice
For a defendant, a well-judged deposit does more than stop interest: it can shift later court costs onto a plaintiff who unreasonably refuses it and then fails. For a plaintiff, rejecting a deposit is a gamble, because if the court later finds the deposit was enough, you pay all the costs of fighting on. Both sides should value the claim carefully before deciding whether to deposit or to refuse, and a debt collection lawyer in Thailand can assess whether an offer meets the claim.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 655/2499 (1956)
Where the plaintiff recovers no more than the amount the defendant had deposited with the court, the plaintiff is made liable for all court costs in place of the defendant under Section 164.
The Supreme Court reduced the damages so that the plaintiff recovered only the amount the defendant had already deposited with the court. Because the plaintiff obtained no more than the deposit, the court ordered the plaintiff to pay all court costs in place of the defendant under Section 164.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 739/2498 (1955)
To attract the cost and interest protection of a deposit under Sections 135 and 164, the money must be deposited in a form the other party can take even without the depositor admitting liability; money paid merely as security while reserving the right to keep contesting the case is not such a deposit.
The court held that a deposit only exempts the depositor from interest and court costs if it is placed in a way that lets the other party take it even without an admission of liability. Where the defendant deposited money merely as security while reserving the right to continue defending, it was not a deposit within Sections 135 and 164.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
What happens to court costs if the plaintiff takes the money deposited with the court?
Under Section 164, if the plaintiff accepts the deposit as full satisfaction of the claim, the defendant is liable for the court costs.
What if the plaintiff refuses the deposit and then loses?
If the court gives judgment against a plaintiff who refused a deposit, Section 164 makes the plaintiff liable for all court costs arising from that refusal to accept the deposited money.