Section 242 — How the Court of Appeal decides an appeal
Statutory text (Thai original)
เมื่อศาลอุทธรณ์ได้ตรวจสำนวนความและฟังคู่ความทั้งปวง หรือสืบพยานต่อไปดังบัญญัติไว้ในมาตรา ๒๔๐ เสร็จแล้ว ให้ศาลอุทธรณ์ชี้ขาดตัดสินอุทธรณ์โดยประการใดประการหนึ่งในสี่ประการนี้
(๑) ถ้าศาลอุทธรณ์เห็นว่า อุทธรณ์นั้นต้องห้ามตามกฎหมาย ก็ให้ยกอุทธรณ์นั้นเสียโดยไม่ต้องวินิจฉัยในประเด็นแห่งอุทธรณ์
(๒) ถ้าศาลอุทธรณ์เห็นว่า คำวินิจฉัยของศาลชั้นต้นถูกต้อง ไม่ว่าโดยเหตุเดียวกันหรือเหตุอื่น ก็ให้พิพากษายืนตามศาลชั้นต้นนั้น
(๓) ถ้าศาลอุทธรณ์เห็นว่า คำชี้ขาดของศาลชั้นต้นไม่ถูกต้อง ให้กลับคำพิพากษาของศาลชั้นต้นเสีย และพิพากษาในปัญหาเหล่านั้นใหม่
(๔) ถ้าศาลอุทธรณ์เห็นว่า คำวินิจฉัยของศาลชั้นต้นถูกแต่บางส่วน และผิดบางส่วน ก็ให้แก้คำพิพากษาศาลชั้นต้นไปตามนั้น โดยพิพากษายืนบางส่วน กลับบางส่วน และมีคำพิพากษาใหม่แทนส่วนที่กลับนั้น
English translation
When the Court of Appeal has examined the case record and heard all parties, or has taken further evidence as provided in Section 240, the Court of Appeal shall decide the appeal in one of the following four ways:
(1) If the Court of Appeal is of the view that the appeal is barred by law, it shall dismiss the appeal without ruling on the issues raised in the appeal.
(2) If the Court of Appeal is of the view that the decision of the court of first instance is correct, whether on the same ground or on another ground, it shall affirm the judgment of that court of first instance.
(3) If the Court of Appeal is of the view that the ruling of the court of first instance is incorrect, it shall reverse the judgment of the court of first instance and give a new judgment on those questions.
(4) If the Court of Appeal is of the view that the decision of the court of first instance is partly correct and partly incorrect, it shall vary the judgment of the court of first instance accordingly, by affirming it in part, reversing it in part, and giving a new judgment in place of the reversed part.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
This section closes the appeal chapter's core mechanics by fixing the only four dispositions open to the Court of Appeal once it has completed its review under Section 240. Item (1) lets the court reject a barred appeal without reaching the merits; items (2) to (4) cover affirmance, reversal, and partial variation. Item (2) makes clear that the trial result may be upheld even on a different legal ground from the one the trial court used. Through Section 252, these dispositions also frame how the Supreme Court disposes of a dika.
Why this matters in practice
For a litigant, the practical point is that not every appeal reaches a decision on the merits: an appeal barred by law, for example one that raises a question of fact where facts cannot be appealed, will simply be dismissed under item (1). It is also worth knowing that a partial win is possible, where the Court of Appeal affirms part of the judgment and reverses another part. If you are considering an appeal, our guide on going to court in Thailand sets out what to expect.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4479/2565 (2022)
An appeal or dika that is barred by law must be dismissed without any ruling on its merits, and this power under Section 242(1) applies in the Supreme Court through Section 252.
After the Court of Appeal affirmed the defendant's murder conviction, that finding became final and the defendant could not dika. The court of first instance had wrongly accepted the dika, so the Supreme Court dismissed it without deciding the merits, applying Section 242(1) with Section 252.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 11102/2558 (2015)
Where an appeal on a question of fact is barred, the Court of Appeal acts unlawfully under Section 242(1) if it rules on that appeal instead of dismissing it.
The defendant's appeal challenged the trial court's assessment of the evidence, a barred question of fact. The Court of Appeal should have dismissed it under Section 242(1); having wrongly decided it, its judgment was set aside and the trial court's judgment was enforced.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 7788/2560 (2017)
A Court of Appeal judgment is not defective merely because it omits the formal statement of disposition under Section 242, provided the reasons for its decision are clearly given.
Although the Court of Appeal did not expressly state whether it dismissed, affirmed, reversed, or varied under Section 242, its judgment set out the reasons for upholding the dismissal of the plaintiff's application, and the decision was held proper.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
What are the four ways the Court of Appeal can decide an appeal?
Under Section 242 it may dismiss an appeal barred by law without ruling on the merits, affirm the trial court, reverse it, or vary it by upholding part and reversing part.
Can the Court of Appeal uphold the trial court on a different reason?
Yes. Section 242(2) allows the court to affirm the judgment whether on the same ground the trial court used or on another ground.
What happens to an appeal that is barred by law?
It is dismissed under Section 242(1) without any decision on the issues raised, for example an appeal on a question of fact that the law does not allow.