Section 361 — Arrest and detention of a judgment debtor
Statutory text (Thai original)
ภายใต้บังคับบทบัญญัติหมวด ๔ การบังคับคดีในกรณีที่ให้ขับไล่ ในกรณีที่ลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาจงใจขัดขืนไม่ปฏิบัติตามคำบังคับ และไม่มีวิธีการบังคับอื่นใดที่เจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาจะใช้บังคับได้ เจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาอาจมีคำขอฝ่ายเดียว ให้ศาลมีคำสั่งจับกุมและกักขังลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาก็ได้
เมื่อได้รับคำขอตามวรรคหนึ่ง ให้ศาลพิจารณาคำขอโดยเร็ว หากเป็นที่พอใจจากพยานหลักฐานซึ่งเจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษานำมาสืบหรือที่ศาลเรียกมาสืบว่า ลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาสามารถที่จะปฏิบัติตามคำบังคับได้ถ้าได้กระทำการโดยสุจริต และเจ้าหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาไม่มีวิธีการบังคับอื่นใดที่จะใช้บังคับได้ ให้ศาลออกหมายจับลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษา
ถ้าลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษามาศาลหรือถูกจับตัวมา แต่ลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาไม่อาจแสดงเหตุอันสมควรในการที่ไม่ปฏิบัติตามคำบังคับได้ ศาลมีอำนาจสั่งกักขังลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาทันทีหรือในวันหนึ่งวันใดที่ลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษายังคงขัดขืนอยู่ก็ได้ หากลูกหนี้ตามคำพิพากษาแสดงเหตุอันสมควรในการที่ไม่ปฏิบัติตามคำบังคับได้ หรือตกลงที่จะปฏิบัติตามคำบังคับทุกประการ ศาลจะมีคำสั่งให้ยกคำขอ หรือมีคำสั่งเป็นอย่างอื่นตามที่เห็นสมควรก็ได้
English translation
Subject to the provisions of Chapter 4 on execution in the case of eviction, where the judgment debtor intentionally disobeys and fails to comply with the writ of execution and there is no other method of enforcement available for the judgment creditor to use, the judgment creditor may make an ex parte application for the court to order the arrest and detention of the judgment debtor.
Upon receiving the application under paragraph one, the court shall consider the application without delay. If the court is satisfied, from the evidence adduced by the judgment creditor or called for by the court, that the judgment debtor is able to comply with the writ of execution if acting in good faith, and that the judgment creditor has no other method of enforcement available, the court shall issue a warrant to arrest the judgment debtor.
If the judgment debtor appears before the court or is arrested and brought before it, but the judgment debtor cannot show reasonable cause for failing to comply with the writ of execution, the court has the power to order the detention of the judgment debtor immediately or on any day on which the judgment debtor continues to disobey. If the judgment debtor shows reasonable cause for failing to comply with the writ of execution, or agrees to comply with the writ in every respect, the court may order that the application be dismissed or make any other order as it considers appropriate.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 361 is the core of Chapter 7, the coercive arrest and detention regime used to compel compliance where no property-based method of execution can work, such as an order to perform or refrain from a personal act. It is deliberately narrow: the creditor must show intentional disobedience, ability to comply in good faith, and the absence of any other enforcement route, and the application is made ex parte so the debtor cannot frustrate it. This provision is cross-referenced throughout the chapter, arrest carries into detention rules in Sections 362 and 363, extends to obstructive guarantors under Section 364, and preserves criminal liability under Section 365. It was renumbered and refined by the Amendment Act (No. 30) B.E. 2560 (2017), and it applies in specialised courts too, for example through Section 26 of the Act Establishing the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court.
Why this matters in practice
Arrest and detention is the strongest pressure the civil courts can apply, but it is not a debt-collection shortcut: it targets a debtor who can obey a personal order and simply will not, not one who cannot pay money. Expect the court to demand solid evidence of both ability and bad faith before issuing a warrant, and note that for a company the court can order the arrest of the director or authorised representative who controls compliance. If your real problem is an unpaid money judgment, the ordinary seizure-and-sale route through a debt collection lawyer is the correct path, not Section 361.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1167/2564 (2021)
Where a corporate judgment debtor disobeys a writ of execution, the court may order the arrest of the managing director as the person authorised to act for the juristic person, together with the individual debtor, applying Section 361 of the Civil Procedure Code (here through Section 26 of the Act Establishing the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court).
The Supreme Court's Intellectual Property and International Trade Division held that the trial court had properly ordered the arrest of the managing director of the corporate defendants, as the person authorised to act for the juristic person, along with the third defendant, on the plaintiff's application under Section 361. It disagreed with the Court of Appeal for Specialised Cases, which had revoked the arrest warrants, and reversed to reinstate the trial court's order.
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 judgment debtor be arrested in a civil case in Thailand?
Yes, but only in narrow circumstances. Under Section 361, if the debtor intentionally disobeys the writ of execution, could comply if acting in good faith, and no other enforcement method is available, the court may issue an arrest and detention warrant.
Can I use Section 361 to collect a money debt?
No. Section 361 targets a debtor who can perform a personal obligation but wilfully refuses, not someone who simply cannot pay. Unpaid money judgments are enforced by seizure and sale of assets instead.
Does the debtor get notice before the arrest application?
No. The creditor files the application ex parte, meaning without prior notice to the debtor, and the court considers it without delay so the debtor cannot evade the process.