Section 207: Retrial after ex parte judgment

Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section

1. Supreme Court Judgment No. 1714/2567 (2024)

   Section 207, which lets a party against whom judgment was given in default of appearance apply for a retrial by applying Sections 199 ter to 199 quinque mutatis mutandis, is a civil provision. It does not govern a motion in a criminal case to set aside an irregular proceeding; that motion is made under Section 27, which section 4 of the Act on the Establishment of Kwaeng Courts and Criminal Procedure in Kwaeng Courts B.E. 2499 brings into criminal proceedings.

   The plaintiff in a private prosecution argued that the first defendant, who applied on 2 May 2565 to set aside the preliminary-hearing proceedings, was out of time under both Section 27 paragraph two and Section 207 read with Section 199 quater paragraph one. The Supreme Court held Section 207 inapplicable, since it deals with a retrial in a civil case, and treated the application as one under Section 27, which the first defendant was not barred from making. An order finding a case prima facie proven is conclusive under section 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code only as to that finding; it neither ends the criminal case nor bars a complaint that the proceedings were irregular.

2. Supreme Court Judgment No. 8539/2560 (2017)

   A Thai court has power to consider and order the setting aside of an arbitral award made in Thailand only; it has no power to set aside an award made abroad. Where the court below therefore lacked that power, the Supreme Court did not need to decide whether the objector could apply for a retrial under Section 207 or had complained of an irregular proceeding within the eight days allowed by Section 27, since neither question would change the result.

   The Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court had set aside an award made by the arbitrators of the International Cotton Association in Liverpool. The Supreme Court held that court had no power to do so, because a Thai court may set aside only an award made in Thailand, consistently with decision 9476/2558 and with the New York Convention. Having so held, it expressly declined to decide the objector's remaining points about a retrial under Section 207 and about setting aside an irregular proceeding under Section 27, because they would not change the outcome.

3. Supreme Court Judgment No. 1516/2559 (2016)

   Where the defendant defaulted of appearance and lost an ex parte judgment, the defendant may request a retrial under Section 207 with Section 199 quater by filing within fifteen days of service of the writ of execution on the defaulting defendant.

   The defendant had defaulted of appearance and lost an ex parte judgment. The Supreme Court confirmed the right to a retrial under Section 207 with Section 199 quater, filed within fifteen days of service of the writ of execution, and noted the finality of the judgment once the retrial period lapses.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.