Section 186 — Closing statements after evidence
Statutory text (Thai original)
เมื่อสืบพยานเสร็จแล้วให้ศาลอนุญาตให้โจทก์แถลงการณ์ด้วยวาจาก่อน แล้วจึงให้จำเลยแถลงการณ์ด้วยวาจาทบทวน ข้อเถียง แสดงผลแห่งพยานหลักฐานในประเด็นที่พิพาท ต่อจากนี้ให้ศาลอนุญาตให้โจทก์แถลงตอบจำเลยได้อีกครั้งหนึ่ง นอกจากนี้ห้ามไม่ให้คู่ความแถลงการณ์ด้วยวาจาอย่างใดอีก เว้นแต่จะได้รับอนุญาตจากศาลก่อนพิพากษาคดี ไม่ว่าคู่ความฝ่ายใดจะได้แถลงการณ์ด้วยวาจาแล้วหรือไม่ คู่ความฝ่ายนั้นจะยื่นคำแถลงการณ์เป็นหนังสือต่อศาลก็ได้ แต่ต้องส่งสำเนานั้น ๆ ไปยังคู่ความอื่น ๆ
English translation
When the taking of evidence is completed, the court shall permit the plaintiff to make an oral closing statement first, and then permit the defendant to make an oral closing statement reviewing the points in issue, arguing the case, and presenting the effect of the evidence on the disputed issues. Thereafter the court shall permit the plaintiff to make a further statement in reply to the defendant one more time. Apart from this, the parties are prohibited from making any further oral statement, unless leave of the court is obtained before judgment is delivered. Whether or not a party has made an oral statement, that party may submit a written closing statement to the court, but a copy thereof must be sent to the other parties.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 186 sits within Title 1 on ordinary procedure in courts of first instance and governs the closing stage of trial, after evidence has been taken and before judgment. It fixes the order of oral submissions (plaintiff, then defendant, then plaintiff in reply) and bars further oral statements without leave. It also preserves each party's right to file a written closing statement, subject to serving a copy on the other parties. As the case law shows, the provision contains no sanction for a failure to serve that copy.
Why this matters in practice
A closing statement is an opportunity to frame the evidence, but it is not a legal requirement: the court must weigh the whole file even if no statement is filed. If you file a written statement, serve a copy on the other side, though failure to do so does not void the statement. For an overview of how a Thai trial reaches this stage, see our guide on going to court in Thailand.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3260/2528 (1985)
A closing statement is merely a party's submission summarizing the law and facts in its favor, and it must already appear in the case file; the court must consider the whole file whether or not a party files one. Section 186 imposes no sanction where a party fails to serve a copy of a written closing statement, so such a statement is not thereby rendered void.
In an employment dispute, the court held that failure to serve a copy of a written closing statement on the opposing party does not invalidate it, because section 186 provides no sanction for that breach and the court must examine the entire file regardless.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
Do I have to file a closing statement?
No. Under section 186 you may make an oral or written closing statement, but it is optional. The court must consider the entire case file even if you file nothing.
What happens if I do not serve a copy of my written closing statement?
Section 186 provides no penalty for that. Courts have held that a written closing statement filed without serving a copy on the other party is not thereby rendered void.
In what order do the parties make closing statements?
The plaintiff speaks first, then the defendant, and then the plaintiff may reply once more. After that, no further oral statement is allowed without the court's leave.