지방법원, 지방법원, 대법원 등 모든 수준의 태국 법원 시스템에서 법적 절차를 진행하는 동안 당사자는 자신의 안전, 권리 보호 또는 이익 보존에 대한 우려를 가질 수 있습니다. 태국 민사소송법은 이러한 우려를 해결하기 위한 메커니즘을 제공합니다. 소송에 관련된 당사자는 법원에 임시 금지 명령을 요청하는 신청서를 제출할 수 있습니다. 이 법적 도구는 상대방이 해를 입히거나 법적 분쟁을 일으킬 수 있는 행위를 하거나 계속하지 못하도록 하기 위한 것입니다.
또한 가처분에는 상대방이 분쟁 중인 재산을 낭비, 훼손, 양도, 판매, 이전 또는 기타 처분하는 등의 행위를 하지 못하도록 하는 조치도 포함될 수 있습니다. 이러한 조치는 소송이 종결될 때까지 또는 법원이 반대되는 명령을 내릴 때까지 유효합니다.
태국 법은 법원의 신중한 적용을 통해 법적 분쟁에 관련된 모든 당사자를 균형 있게 고려하도록 설계되었습니다. 법이 한 당사자에게 불균형적으로 유리할 수 있는 일부 관할권과 달리 태국 민사소송법은 특히 임시 금지명령의 맥락에서 원고와 피고 모두에게 공평한 대우를 보장하는 틀을 제공합니다.
이러한 균형 잡힌 접근 방식은 공정성과 정의를 향한 태국 법체계의 노력을 강조하며 법원의 최종 결정 전까지 양 당사자에게 권리와 이익을 보호할 수 있는 기회를 제공합니다.
1. The Thai Civil Procedure Code in relation to the Temporary Injunction Relief for the Plaintiff
A plaintiff who files a civil case against a debtor (could be a family member or simply an acquaintance) in whatsoever liabilities and obligations e.g. loan, hire of work, lease, sale, and purchase agreement, etc., may be concerned about a remedy and compensation which has to be fulfilled by such debtor. In some cases, the debtor fails or is not willing to comply and settle any liabilities and obligations to the lender.
In the event that the debtor is unwilling to sell, transfer and/or dispose of his/her assets, the plaintiff shall submit an application to the court to order an injunction or a measure to impede such debtor's act.
The Thai Civil Procedure Code of Thailand, Section 254 stipulates that:
“In a case other than a petty case (e.g. a case having the case capital of not more than 300 thousand baht), the plaintiff is entitled to file with the Court, together with his plaint or at any time before judgment, an ex parte (one side) application requesting the Court to order, subject to the conditions hereinafter provided….”When a plaintiff seeks an injunction from the Court, there are four main purposes or measures for which such an application can be filed:
Seizure Before Judgment: This measure allows for the seizure of all or part of the property in dispute that belongs to the defendant, as well as any money or property owed to the defendant by a third party.
Temporary Restraining Order: This injunction prevents the defendant from repeating or continuing any wrongful act, breach of agreement, or the specific act that led to the case filing. It may also include other orders necessary to provide relief to the plaintiff from the defendant’s actions.
Order for Temporary Changes in Registration: This involves requesting the registrar to temporarily extinguish, amend, or revoke the registration related to the asset in dispute or the defendant’s property.
Temporary Detention of the Defendant: In certain circumstances, the court may order the temporary arrest and detention of the defendant.For the Court to consider an injunction application, the plaintiff must demonstrate that there is a valid reason for the request and that the proposed measure is necessary for their protection.
Additionally, specific criteria must be met for each type of measure. For example, if a plaintiff requests an injunction to prevent the transfer of land by the defendant, evidence must be presented to the Court showing the defendant's intent to register, amend, or revoke the land's registration. This is essential for the Court to approve the temporary injunction request.
2. The Thai Civil Procedure Code in relation to the Temporary Injunction Relief for the Defendant
The Thai Civil Procedure Code grants defendants the right to request that the plaintiff deposit a sum of money, furnish a security for payment, or procure security to cover potential unforeseen events. This provision ensures that defendants are protected against possible financial losses that may arise during the course of legal proceedings.
The Thai Civil Procedure Code, Section 253 stipulates that:
“Where the plaintiff is not domiciled or his business office is not situated within the Kingdom and he does not have property liable to execution within the Kingdom or where there is strong reason to believe that he will, if he loses the case, evade the payment of costs and expenses, the defendant may, at any time before judgment, file an application by motion with the Court for an order directing the plaintiff to deposit money or to furnish security for such payment costs and expenses.”The point of Section 253 is that the defendant can file an application to the Court for an order directing the plaintiff to deposit money or security if:
1. The plaintiff is a foreigner or is a foreign entity of which their business office or domicile is not in Thailand or does not have a property in Thailand; or
2. There is a strong reason to believe that the plaintiff will evade the payment of costs and expenses if he loses the case.
The Thai Civil Procedure Code affords defendants the right to request that plaintiffs either deposit money or provide security to cover potential payments or costs arising from unforeseen events during legal proceedings. This provision is particularly relevant in scenarios where the plaintiff, whether an individual or a business entity, has a domicile or is registered outside Thailand—for instance, if a plaintiff once operated a business within Thailand but has since relocated operations abroad.
Additionally, this right becomes pertinent if, during the examination of a plaintiff's witness, there is an indication that the plaintiff might not cover the court costs and fees should the court dismiss their charge or find in favor of the defendant. It is important to note that this motion can be filed at any stage of the proceedings, including appeals to the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
Should the Court, upon reviewing the motion and conducting necessary examinations, find the defendant’s request warranted, it will mandate the plaintiff to deposit the specified money or security within a set timeframe. Failure to comply will result in the case being removed from the court's docket, unless the defendant opts to continue or the plaintiff successfully appeals the order.
Conversely, if the Court denies the defendant's application, the defendant retains the right to appeal this decision. It's also crucial to understand that even if the case is struck from the record, the plaintiff is not barred from refiling the case against the defendant. This is because the dismissal is procedural, without the Court having addressed the substantive issue at hand.
법무법인 저스로 앤 컨설트의 민사 소송에 대한 광범위한 경험을 바탕으로, 특히 채무 회수 사건에서 가처분 신청은 원고의 권리를 보호하는 전략적 접근 방식이라는 사실을 발견했습니다. 가처분 신청은 채무자의 선의나 윤리적 행동에만 의존하지 않고 채무자가 재정적 의무를 이행할 것이라는 보다 확실한 보증 역할을 합니다. 이러한 접근 방식은 원고가 외국인인 경우에 특히 적합하며, 이는 이러한 시나리오에서 직면하는 복잡성에 대한 이해를 반영합니다.
당사의 노련한 변호사들은 원고를 대리할 때 법원의 판결이 나오기 전에 고객의 권리를 확보하기 위해 가처분 신청을 권유하는 경우가 많습니다. 태국의 법률 문제에 대한 추가 정보나 도움이 필요한 경우, Juslaws & Consult는 전문적인 법률 상담 및 서비스를 제공할 준비가 되어 있습니다. 고객의 소송에 법원 금지 명령이 필요한 경우, 당사는 이 절차를 원활하게 진행하기 위해 최대한의 지원을 제공할 것을 약속합니다. Juslaws & Consult는 고객의 고유한 요구에 맞춘 종합적인 법률 솔루션을 제공하기 위해 최선을 다하고 있습니다.
