Section 199 — Defaulting defendant who appears in time
Statutory text (Thai original)
ถ้าจำเลยที่ขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การมาศาลก่อนศาลวินิจฉัยชี้ขาดคดีและแจ้งต่อศาลในโอกาสแรกว่าตนประสงค์จะต่อสู้คดี เมื่อศาลเห็นว่าการขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การนั้นมิได้เป็นไปโดยจงใจหรือมีเหตุอันสมควร ให้ศาลมีคำสั่งอนุญาตให้จำเลยยื่นคำให้การภายในกำหนดเวลาตามที่ศาลเห็นสมควร และดำเนินกระบวนพิจารณาใหม่ตั้งแต่เวลาที่จำเลยขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การ
ในกรณีตามวรรคหนึ่ง ถ้าจำเลยที่ขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การมิได้แจ้งต่อศาลก็ดี หรือศาลเห็นว่าการขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การนั้นเป็นไปโดยจงใจหรือไม่มีเหตุอันสมควรก็ดี ให้ศาลดำเนินกระบวนพิจารณาต่อไป ในกรณีเช่นนี้ จำเลยอาจถามค้านพยานโจทก์ที่อยู่ระหว่างการสืบได้ แต่จะนำสืบพยานหลักฐานของตนไม่ได้
ในกรณีที่จำเลยมิได้ยื่นคำให้การภายในกำหนดเวลาตามวรรคหนึ่ง หรือศาลไม่อนุญาตให้จำเลยยื่นคำให้การตามวรรคสอง หรือศาลเคยมีคำสั่งให้พิจารณาคดีใหม่ ตามคำขอของจำเลยที่ขาดนัดยื่นคำให้การตามมาตรา ๑๙๙ ตรี มาก่อน จำเลยนั้นจะขอยื่นคำให้การตามมาตรานี้อีกหรือจะร้องขอให้พิจารณาคดีใหม่ไม่ได้
English translation
If a defendant who is in default of answer appears at the court before the court adjudicates the case and informs the court at the first opportunity that he intends to contest the case, then, if the court is of the opinion that the default of answer was not intentional or that there was reasonable cause, the court shall issue an order permitting the defendant to file an answer within such period as the court thinks fit, and shall conduct the proceedings anew from the time the defendant fell into default of answer.
In the case under paragraph one, if the defendant who is in default of answer does not so inform the court, or the court is of the opinion that the default of answer was intentional or that there was no reasonable cause, the court shall proceed with the trial. In such a case, the defendant may cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses who are being examined, but may not adduce his own evidence.
Where the defendant does not file an answer within the period under paragraph one, or the court does not permit the defendant to file an answer under paragraph two, or the court has previously ordered a new trial upon the application of the defendant in default of answer under Section 199 ter, that defendant may not again apply to file an answer under this Section or apply for a new trial.
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 is the in-trial rescue route for a defendant who has fallen into default of answer but comes forward before judgment. Two conditions must be met: the defendant must announce at the first opportunity an intention to contest, and the court must find the default was not intentional or was for reasonable cause. If both are met, the court reopens the case by allowing an answer and running the proceedings again from the point of default. If either fails, the trial continues on a limited footing: the defendant keeps a right to cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses but cannot lead his own evidence. Paragraph three bars a second bite: a defendant who missed the new answer period, was refused, or has already obtained one new trial under Section 199 ter cannot use this Section again or seek a fresh new trial.
Why this matters in practice
If you have missed your deadline to answer but the case is not yet decided, act immediately: go to court and state on the record, at your very first chance, that you want to defend. Waiting or staying quiet can cost you the right to file an answer and leave you only able to cross-examine, not to put in your own evidence. Be ready to explain why the default was not deliberate. Because the standards are strict, getting a lawyer involved fast materially improves your chances.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 5222/2567 (2024)
Under Section 199 paragraph two, a defendant in default of answer who was not permitted to file an answer has no right to adduce his own evidence, so allowing him to present additional evidence, including on appeal under Section 240 (2), is improper.
The Appeal Court had allowed the defaulting defendant to bring in additional evidence and relied on it. The Supreme Court held this was improper because, under Section 199 paragraph two together with Section 240 (2), a defendant in default of answer who was not permitted to answer may not adduce his own evidence.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4637/2567 (2024)
A defendant in default of answer still has the right to cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses, only being barred from adducing his own evidence under Section 199 paragraph two, so the court must notify him of the hearing dates; failing to do so makes the proceedings improper.
The trial court set hearing dates and gave judgment without notifying the other defaulting defendants. The Supreme Court held this was improper because a defendant in default of answer retains the right to cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses under Section 199 paragraph two, and so was entitled to be told of the hearing dates.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1479/2562 (2019)
A defaulting defendant who appears but does not inform the court at the first opportunity of an intention to contest does not meet the conditions of Section 199 paragraph one, so the court may refuse the request to file an answer.
The defendants' counsel had appeared but did not lodge the request at the first opportunity. The trial court held that this failed the conditions of Section 199 paragraph one and dismissed the request, then proceeded to take the plaintiffs' evidence with cross-examination only.
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 defendant who missed the answer deadline still defend the case?
Yes, if he appears before judgment and tells the court at the first opportunity that he intends to contest, and the court finds the default was not intentional or was for reasonable cause. The court may then allow an answer under Section 199.
What can a defaulting defendant do if the court does not allow an answer?
Under paragraph two, the defendant may cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses being examined but may not adduce his own evidence.
Can a defendant use Section 199 more than once?
No. Under paragraph three, a defendant who missed the new answer period, was refused, or already obtained a new trial under Section 199 ter cannot apply again under this Section or seek a further new trial.