Section 199 quinquies — Deciding the new trial application
Statutory text (Thai original)
เมื่อศาลได้รับคำขอให้พิจารณาคดีใหม่แล้ว หากเห็นสมควรศาลจะมีคำสั่งให้งดการบังคับคดีไว้ก่อนก็ได้ ในกรณีเช่นนี้ ให้ศาลแจ้งคำสั่งให้เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีทราบ
ในการพิจารณาคำขอให้พิจารณาคดีใหม่ ถ้ามีเหตุควรเชื่อว่าการขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การนั้นมิได้เป็นไปโดยจงใจหรือมีเหตุอันสมควร และศาลเห็นว่าเหตุผลที่อ้างมาในคำขอนั้นผู้ขออาจมีทางชนะคดีได้ ทั้งในกรณีที่ยื่นคำขอล่าช้านั้นผู้ขอได้ยื่นภายในระยะเวลาที่กำหนด ให้ศาลมีคำสั่งอนุญาตตามคำขอ ในกรณีเช่นนี้ ถ้ามีการอุทธรณ์หรือฎีกาคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งที่ให้คู่ความฝ่ายที่ขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การแพ้คดี ให้ศาลแจ้งคำสั่งดังกล่าวให้ศาลอุทธรณ์หรือศาลฎีกา แล้วแต่กรณี ทราบด้วย
เมื่อศาลได้มีคำสั่งอนุญาตตามคำขอให้พิจารณาคดีใหม่ตามวรรคสอง คำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งของศาลโดยจำเลยขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การและคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งอื่น ๆ ของศาลอุทธรณ์หรือศาลฎีกาในคดีเดียวกันนั้น และวิธีการบังคับคดีที่ได้ดำเนินไปแล้ว ให้ถือว่าเป็นอันเพิกถอนไปในตัว และให้ศาลแจ้งให้เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีทราบ แต่ถ้าเป็นการพ้นวิสัยที่จะให้คู่ความกลับคืนสู่ฐานะเดิมดังเช่นก่อนบังคับคดีได้ หรือเมื่อศาลเห็นว่าไม่จำเป็นที่จะบังคับเช่นนั้น เพื่อประโยชน์แก่คู่ความหรือบุคคลภายนอก ให้ศาลมีอำนาจสั่งอย่างใด ๆ ตามที่เห็นสมควร แล้วให้ศาลพิจารณาคดีนั้นใหม่ตั้งแต่เวลาที่จำเลยขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การ โดยให้จำเลยยื่นคำให้การภายในกำหนดเวลาตามที่ศาลเห็นสมควร
คำสั่งศาลที่อนุญาตให้พิจารณาคดีใหม่ให้เป็นที่สุด แต่ในกรณีที่ศาลมีคำสั่งไม่อนุญาตผู้ขออาจอุทธรณ์คำสั่งดังกล่าวได้ คำพิพากษาของศาลอุทธรณ์ให้เป็นที่สุด
ถ้าจำเลยขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การโดยจงใจหรือไม่มีเหตุอันสมควรเป็นเหตุให้คู่ความอีกฝ่ายหนึ่งต้องเสียค่าฤชาธรรมเนียมมากกว่าที่ควรจะต้องเสีย ค่าฤชาธรรมที่เพิ่มขึ้นนั้นให้ถือว่าเป็นค่าฤชาธรรมเนียมอันไม่จำเป็นตามความหมายแห่งมาตรา ๑๖๖
English translation
When the court has received an application for a new trial, the court may, if it thinks fit, order a stay of execution beforehand. In such a case, the court shall notify the execution officer of the order.
In considering the application for a new trial, if there is reason to believe that the default of answer was not intentional or that there was reasonable cause, and the court is of the opinion that the grounds stated in the application show that the applicant may have a chance of winning the case, and, where the application was filed late, that the applicant filed it within the prescribed period, the court shall issue an order granting the application. In such a case, if there is an appeal or a further appeal against the judgment or order adjudicating the party in default of answer the losing party, the court shall also notify the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, of that order.
When the court has issued an order granting the application for a new trial under paragraph two, the court's judgment or order rendered by default of answer, and any other judgment or order of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court in the same case, together with the measures of execution already carried out, shall be deemed to be revoked as a matter of course, and the court shall notify the execution officer. However, if it is impossible to restore the parties to their former position as before the execution, or where the court is of the opinion that it is not necessary to do so, then, for the benefit of the parties or of third persons, the court shall have the power to make any order it thinks fit; and the court shall then try that case anew from the time the defendant fell into default of answer, requiring the defendant to file an answer within such period as the court thinks fit.
An order of the court granting a new trial shall be final. However, where the court issues an order refusing the application, the applicant may appeal against that order, and the judgment of the Court of Appeal shall be final.
If the defendant was in default of answer intentionally or without reasonable cause, thereby causing the other party to incur costs more than it should have, the costs so increased shall be deemed to be unnecessary costs within the meaning of Section 166.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 199 quinque is the decision stage of the new trial process. It lets the court stay execution while the application is pending, then sets the test for granting it: the default must appear unintentional or excusable, the stated grounds must show a real chance of success, and any late application must be within the permitted period. Granting the application has a sweeping effect: the default judgment, any appellate decisions in the case, and the enforcement measures already taken are all deemed revoked as a matter of course, and the case is retried from the point of default. Where restoring the status quo is impossible or unnecessary, the court may make protective orders for the parties or third persons. Finality is asymmetric: an order granting a new trial is final, but a refusal may be appealed once, with the Court of Appeal's judgment final. The last paragraph shifts the wasted costs of a deliberate default onto the defaulting party under Section 166.
Why this matters in practice
A big advantage of the new trial route is that, if the court grants it, the default judgment and the seizures already carried out are treated as revoked, and you get a genuine retrial. But note the finality rule: if the court grants a new trial, the other side cannot appeal that grant, while if it refuses you, you get only one appeal. Ask the court to stay execution early so assets are not sold while your application is pending. If the default was deliberate, expect to bear the extra costs you caused. Weigh this against the realities of litigation before committing.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 6625/2558 (2015)
Under Section 199 quinque read with Section 207, a court may grant a new trial only where there is reason to believe the default of answer or of appearance was not intentional or was for reasonable cause and the applicant may have a chance of winning; a weak excuse and defense will not suffice.
Because the special bankruptcy court law did not provide its own new trial procedure, the Civil Procedure Code applied by analogy. Under Section 199 quinque read with Section 207, the court weighed the second defendant's evidence and grounds, including a claim of being abroad, against the requirement that the default be unintentional or excusable and that the applicant might win.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3607/2561 (2018)
An order granting a new trial that was made through an irregular proceeding under Section 27, a matter of public order, has no effect in revoking the original default judgment under Section 199 quinque paragraph three, even though such a granting order is otherwise final.
The Supreme Court held that where the order granting a new trial resulted from an irregular proceeding under Section 27, it was unlawful and, despite being final, did not revoke the original divorce judgment under Section 199 quinque paragraph three, so the earlier judgment dissolving the marriage stood.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 12501/2558 (2015)
Under Section 199 quinque paragraph four, an order granting a new trial is final, so where such an order has become final a third person cannot then intervene in the case under Section 57 (1).
The trial court held that because the order granting a new trial was final under Section 199 quinque paragraph four, the interveners had no right to file their intervention under Section 57 (1). The appellate courts affirmed, and the case was later struck off after the plaintiff died.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
When will the court grant a new trial?
Under Section 199 quinque, the court grants a new trial where there is reason to believe the default was not intentional or was for reasonable cause, the grounds show the applicant may win, and any late application was within the permitted period.
What is the effect of granting a new trial?
The default judgment, any appellate decisions in the case, and the enforcement already carried out are deemed revoked, and the case is tried anew from the point of default, with the defendant allowed to file an answer.
Can the parties appeal a decision on a new trial application?
An order granting a new trial is final. An order refusing the application may be appealed once, and the judgment of the Court of Appeal on that appeal is final.