Section 289 — When the officer must stay execution
Statutory text (Thai original)
ให้เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีงดการบังคับคดีในกรณีดังต่อไปนี้
(๑) เมื่อศาลได้มีคำสั่งให้งดการบังคับคดีเพราะเหตุมีการยื่นคำขอให้พิจารณาคดีใหม่และได้แจ้งให้เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีทราบตามที่บัญญัติไว้ในมาตรา ๑๙๙ เบญจ วรรคหนึ่ง หรือมาตรา ๒๐๗
ในกรณีดังกล่าว ถ้าเจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษายื่นคำร้องว่าตนอาจได้รับความเสียหายจากการยื่นคำขอดังกล่าวและมีพยานหลักฐานเบื้องต้นแสดงว่าคำขอนั้นไม่มีมูลและยื่นเข้ามาเพื่อประวิงการบังคับคดี ศาลมีอำนาจสั่งให้ลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาวางเงินหรือหาประกันตามที่ศาลเห็นสมควรภายในระยะเวลาที่ศาลจะกำหนด เพื่อเป็นประกันการชำระค่าสินไหมทดแทนแก่เจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาสำหรับความเสียหายที่อาจได้รับเนื่องจากเหตุเนิ่นช้าในการบังคับคดีอันเกิดจากการยื่นคำขอนั้น หรือกำหนดวิธีการชั่วคราวเพื่อคุ้มครองอย่างใด ๆ ตามที่เห็นสมควรก็ได้ ถ้าลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาไม่ปฏิบัติตามคำสั่งศาล ให้ศาลสั่งเพิกถอนคำสั่งที่ให้งดการบังคับคดี
(๒) เมื่อศาลได้มีคำสั่งให้งดการบังคับคดี และได้ส่งคำสั่งนั้นไปให้เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีทราบ ในกรณีเช่นนี้ให้เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีงดการบังคับคดีไว้ภายในระยะเวลาหรือเงื่อนไขตามที่ศาลกำหนด
(๓) เมื่อเจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาได้แจ้งเป็นหนังสือไปยังเจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีว่าตนตกลงงดการบังคับคดีไว้ชั่วระยะเวลาที่กำหนดไว้หรือภายในเงื่อนไขอย่างใดอย่างหนึ่งโดยได้รับความยินยอมเป็นหนังสือจากลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาและบุคคลภายนอกผู้มีส่วนได้เสียในการบังคับคดี
(๔) เมื่อเจ้าหนี้ผู้ขอบังคับคดีไม่ปฏิบัติตามมาตรา ๑๕๔
ให้เจ้าพนักงานบังคับคดีส่งคำบอกกล่าวงดการบังคับคดีให้เจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาและบุคคลภายนอกผู้มีส่วนได้เสียทราบโดยไม่ชักช้า เว้นแต่จะได้งดการบังคับคดีตามคำขอของบุคคลนั้นเอง
English translation
The executing officer shall stay the execution in the following cases:
(1) where the court has ordered a stay of execution by reason of the filing of an application for a new trial and has notified the executing officer as provided in Section 199 quinque, paragraph one, or Section 207.
In such case, if the judgment creditor files a motion stating that he may suffer damage from the filing of the application and there is prima facie evidence showing that the application is without merit and was filed to delay the execution, the court has the power to order the judgment debtor to deposit money or furnish security as it thinks fit within the period it sets, as security for payment of compensation to the judgment creditor for the damage that may be sustained through the delay in execution arising from the filing of the application, or to lay down any provisional measure of protection as it thinks fit. If the judgment debtor does not comply with the court's order, the court shall order the revocation of the order staying the execution;
(2) where the court has ordered a stay of execution and has sent that order to notify the executing officer. In such case the executing officer shall stay the execution within the period or on the conditions set by the court;
(3) where the judgment creditor has notified the executing officer in writing that he agrees to stay the execution for a fixed period or on any condition, with the written consent of the judgment debtor and of the third parties having an interest in the execution;
(4) where the creditor who applied for execution fails to comply with Section 154.
The executing officer shall serve notice of the stay of execution on the judgment creditor and the third parties having an interest without delay, except where the execution has been stayed at the request of that person himself.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 289 opens Part 8 on stay of execution and enumerates the four situations in which the executing officer must suspend enforcement, ranging from court-ordered stays tied to a new-trial application, through general court-ordered stays, to a consensual stay and a stay triggered by the creditor's default under Section 154. It builds in a safeguard for creditors under (1): the court may require the debtor to post security or impose protective measures where a new-trial application looks meritless and dilatory, and may revoke the stay if the debtor does not comply. The section works with Section 290 on debtor-requested stays and Section 291 on resuming execution. It reflects the 2017 renumbering of the execution provisions.
Why this matters in practice
For a creditor, the key point is that a stay is not automatic just because the debtor files something: if the debtor uses a meritless new-trial application to stall, you can ask the court to make the debtor post security and to revoke the stay if they do not. For a debtor, a written stay under (3) works only with the proper written consents. Getting these mechanics right can save or cost months in a debt collection case.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2159/2567 (2024)
Where the court has not ordered the executing officer to stay an auction and none of the grounds in Section 289 (1) to (4), nor Section 290, exists, the officer's execution and auction are lawful and there is no ground to set them aside.
The debtors' motion to stay the auction was in effect dismissed, and the court had not ordered the officer to stay the sale. The Supreme Court held that with no ground under Section 289 (1) to (4) or Section 290 present, the execution and auction to satisfy the compromise judgment were lawful and would not be set aside.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 742/2567 (2024)
Under Section 289 (3), the executing officer may stay execution on the creditor's written notice only where the judgment debtor has given written consent; a creditor bound by a restructuring agreement to stay who fails to give the officer such written notice is liable for the resulting auction.
The defendant creditor had agreed to stay execution as part of a debt-restructuring deal, and the debtor had given written consent to stay the auction. Because the creditor did not give the executing officer the written notice required by Section 289 (3), the property was auctioned, and the Court treated the creditor's failure as negligence causing the plaintiff's loss.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2581/2561 (2018)
Section 289 (3) requires the written consent of the judgment debtor and interested third parties before the executing officer may stay execution or postpone an auction; a creditor's request alone, without such consent, does not compel the officer to stay.
An executing officer testified that on the auction day, a creditor's request to postpone without proof of the debtor's consent would not lead to a stay. The Court found this consistent with Section 289 (3): only with the written consent of the judgment debtor and interested third parties does the officer have power to stay execution or postpone the sale.
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 does the enforcement officer have to stop an execution?
Under Section 289 the officer must stay execution on a court order tied to a new-trial application, on any other court stay order, on the creditor's written stay with the required consents, or when the creditor defaults under Section 154.
Can the creditor stop the debtor from abusing a stay?
Yes. Under Section 289 (1), if a new-trial application looks meritless and dilatory, the court may order the debtor to post security or impose protective measures, and revoke the stay if the debtor does not comply.
What consent is needed for a written stay of execution?
Section 289 (3) requires the judgment creditor's written notice to the officer plus the written consent of the judgment debtor and any interested third parties.