Section 240 — How the appellate court decides
Statutory text (Thai original)
ศาลอุทธรณ์มีอำนาจที่จะวินิจฉัยคดีโดยเพียงแต่พิจารณาฟ้องอุทธรณ์ คำแก้อุทธรณ์ เอกสาร และหลักฐานทั้งปวง ในสำนวนความซึ่งศาลชั้นต้นส่งขึ้นมา เว้นแต่
(๑) ศาลอุทธรณ์ได้นัดฟังคำแถลงการณ์ด้วยวาจาตามที่บัญญัติไว้ในมาตรา ๒๔๑ แต่ถ้าคู่ความฝ่ายใดหรือทั้งสองฝ่ายไม่มาศาลในวันกำหนดนัด ศาลอุทธรณ์อาจดำเนินคดีไปได้ และคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่งของศาลอุทธรณ์นั้น ไม่ให้ถือเป็นคำพิพากษาโดยขาดนัด
(๒) ถ้าศาลอุทธรณ์ยังไม่เป็นที่พอใจในการพิจารณาฟ้องอุทธรณ์ คำแก้อุทธรณ์ และพยานหลักฐาน ที่ปรากฏในสำนวน ภายใต้บังคับแห่งมาตรา ๒๓๘ และเฉพาะในปัญหาที่อุทธรณ์ให้ศาลมีอำนาจที่จะกำหนดประเด็นทำการสืบพยานที่สืบมาแล้ว หรือพยานที่เห็นควรสืบต่อไป และพิจารณาคดีโดยทั่ว ๆ ไป ดังที่บัญญัติไว้ในประมวลกฎหมายนี้สำหรับการพิจารณาในศาลชั้นต้น และให้นำบทบัญญัติแห่งประมวลกฎหมายนี้ว่าด้วยการพิจารณาในศาลชั้นต้น มาใช้บังคับด้วยโดยอนุโลม
(๓) ในคดีที่คู่ความอุทธรณ์ในปัญหาข้อกฎหมาย ถ้าศาลอุทธรณ์เห็นว่าศาลชั้นต้นยังมิได้พิจารณาหรือวินิจฉัยปัญหาข้อเท็จจริงอันเป็นสาระสำคัญในประเด็นให้ศาลอุทธรณ์มีอำนาจทำคำสั่งให้ศาลชั้นต้นพิจารณาปัญหาข้อเท็จจริงเช่นว่านั้น แล้วพิพากษาไปตามรูปความ
English translation
The appellate court has power to decide the case merely by considering the appeal, the answer to the appeal, and all the documents and evidence in the case file forwarded by the court of first instance, except:
(1) where the appellate court has set a date to hear oral submissions as provided in Section 241; but if either party or both parties fail to appear at the appointed time, the appellate court may proceed with the case, and its judgment or order shall not be regarded as a judgment by default;
(2) where the appellate court is not yet satisfied by its consideration of the appeal, the answer to the appeal, and the evidence appearing in the case file, then, subject to Section 238 and only on the issues under appeal, the court shall have power to frame the issues, take evidence already taken or evidence it thinks fit to take further, and conduct the proceedings generally as provided in this Code for proceedings in the court of first instance; and the provisions of this Code concerning proceedings in the court of first instance shall apply mutatis mutandis;
(3) in a case in which the parties appeal on a question of law, if the appellate court is of the opinion that the court of first instance has not yet considered or decided a question of fact that is material to the issues, the appellate court shall have power to order the court of first instance to consider such a question of fact, and then to give judgment according to the case.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 240 defines the appellate court's decision-making method. The default is decision on the file, without a fresh trial. Three exceptions follow. Subsection (1) covers oral-submission hearings under Section 241 and provides that non-appearance does not create a default judgment. Subsection (2) lets the court, when unsatisfied and subject to Section 238, frame issues and take evidence on the appealed points, applying first-instance procedure by analogy. Subsection (3) allows the court, in a law-question appeal, to remit a material fact the trial court never decided. A key limit runs through the Section: these powers presuppose a lawful appeal, so subsection (2) does not apply to an appeal that is itself defective, for example one that fails to state clear grounds under Section 225.
Why this matters in practice
Expect your appeal to be decided on the papers, so your written appeal and answer must carry the case; do not rely on getting an oral hearing. If you want the appellate court to take further evidence, it can do so under subsection (2), but only if your appeal is itself lawful and clearly states its grounds, so a vague or copy-paste appeal may be rejected before this power is ever reached. If a law-question appeal exposes a material fact the trial court never decided, the appellate court can send it back under subsection (3) rather than deciding it blind. Draft the appeal to stand entirely on its written record.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 5222/2567 (2024)
Under Section 240(2), where the appellate court is not satisfied by the appeal, the answer, and the evidence in the file, subject to Section 238 and only on the appealed issues, it may frame issues and take evidence already taken or further evidence, applying first-instance procedure by analogy.
The Court of Appeal allowed the defendant to submit additional documents and had the trial court summon a witness to testify in support. The Supreme Court set out Section 240(2), confirming the appellate court's power, when unsatisfied, to frame issues and take further evidence on the appealed points.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 5668/2567 (2024)
The appellate court's power to take further steps under Section 240(2) presupposes a lawful appeal; an appeal that merely copies the defence and does not clearly dispute the trial court's reasoning is unlawful under Section 225 paragraph one and is not entertained.
The first defendant's appeal largely copied the defence and did not clearly dispute the trial court's reasoning. The Supreme Court held it unlawful under Section 225 paragraph one, and that the Section 240(2) power presupposes a lawful appeal, so the Court of Appeal was right not to entertain 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
Does the appellate court hold a new trial?
Usually not. Under Section 240, the appellate court normally decides the case on the appeal, the answer, and the case file. It only takes further evidence in the limited circumstances of subsection (2).
If I miss the oral-submission hearing, do I lose by default?
No. Under Section 240(1), if a party fails to appear at the appointed time the appellate court may proceed, and its decision is not treated as a judgment by default.
Can the appellate court take more evidence?
Yes, under Section 240(2), if it is not satisfied with the record. But this power applies only to a lawful appeal, so a defective appeal that does not clearly state its grounds may be rejected first.