Section 168 — No appeal on court costs alone
Statutory text (Thai original)
ในกรณีที่คู่ความอาจอุทธรณ์ หรือฎีกาคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งของศาลได้นั้น ห้ามมิให้คู่ความอุทธรณ์หรือฎีกาในปัญหาเรื่องค่าฤชาธรรมเนียมแต่อย่างเดียว เว้นแต่อุทธรณ์หรือฎีกานั้นจะได้ยกเหตุว่า ค่าฤชาธรรมเนียมนั้นมิได้กำหนดหรือคำนวณให้ถูกต้องตามกฎหมาย
English translation
In a case where the parties may appeal or file a further appeal (dika) against the judgment or order of the court, no party shall appeal or file a dika on the question of court costs alone, unless the appeal or dika raises the ground that the court costs were not fixed or calculated in accordance with the law.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 168 restricts appeals and further appeals that concern nothing but court costs, so a party who is content with the merits cannot drag the case up a level merely to argue about the size of a costs award. The single gateway is a claim that the costs were not fixed or calculated in accordance with law, which is a legality challenge rather than a complaint that the amount is too high. A dissatisfied party who only says the fee is excessive, without alleging an unlawful calculation, files an appeal that is prohibited and will not be entertained. The bar applies at both the appeal (uthon) and the dika stage.
Why this matters in practice
Before appealing a costs award, check whether your real complaint is that the amount is simply too high, because that alone is a prohibited appeal under Section 168. To get through, you must show the costs were not fixed or calculated as the law requires, for example a fee set outside the statutory scale. This makes it important to raise any genuine calculation error clearly in the appeal or dika, since the court will reject an appeal that only quarrels with the size of the award.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 8899/2561 (2018)
A dika arguing only that the trial court fixed the court fee to be paid to the plaintiff too high, without raising that the court did not fix or calculate it in accordance with law, is a prohibited dika under Section 168 and will not be entertained.
The only remaining issue on the defendants' dika was that the trial court had set the court fee payable to the plaintiff too high. Because the dika did not raise that the fee was not fixed or calculated in accordance with law, the court held it prohibited under Section 168 and declined to decide it.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 9835/2558 (2015)
An appeal asking only for the refund of a court fee, without raising that the court costs were not fixed or calculated in accordance with law, is an appeal on court costs alone and is prohibited under Section 168; accepting and deciding it is unlawful.
The petitioner appealed only to recover a court fee first paid, which flowed from the petitioner's own procedural error. The court held this was an appeal on court costs alone with no allegation of unlawful fixing or calculation, so it was prohibited under Section 168, and the acceptance and decision of the appeal below were improper.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 6942/2558 (2015)
Where the attorney fee ordered for the winning side falls within the minimum and maximum of the Table 6 scale in force at the time of filing, a dika complaining only that it is too high is a prohibited dika under Section 168.
The court held that the attorney fee the trial court ordered the defendants to pay was within the minimum and maximum of the Table 6 scale in force from the date of filing until the case became final. The defendants' dika on that fee was therefore only about the amount and was prohibited under Section 168, so the court declined to decide it.
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 I appeal only about the court costs?
Generally no. Section 168 prohibits an appeal or dika on court costs alone, unless you raise that the costs were not fixed or calculated in accordance with the law.
Is arguing that the fee is too high enough to appeal?
No. Merely arguing the amount is excessive is a prohibited appeal under Section 168. You must show the costs were fixed or calculated unlawfully, not just that they are high.