Quick Links: Thailand Law Seminars and Conference | Thai Law Forum Past Issues | About Thailand Law Forum | Advertising Guidelines | Publishing Guidelines

Feature Articles :

History of Cannabis
  and Anti-Marijuana
  Laws in Thailand

Thailand’s Notable
  Criminal Extradition

Guide for Tourists
  to Laws in Thailand

Neither Free nor Fair:
  Burma’s Sham Elections

Sex Laws in Thailand:
  Part 1

Renewable Energy
  in Thailand

Transsexuals and
  Thai Law

Foreign Mafia in

Submissions :

Chaninat & Leeds, a Thailand law office, assisted in the development of content for this website. Lawyers at Chaninat & Leeds provide professional attorney advice in family law and specialize in preparing Thailand prenuptial agreements.


Supreme Court Opinion Summaries (1/2551)

Note concerning Thailand Supreme court opinions: Thailand is a civil law jurisdiction that also has elements of the common law system. Accordingly, the principle law sources are acts, statutes and regulations. However, published Supreme court decisions are an important part of the legal development of Thailand and are frequently used as a secondary authority. (Summaries sponsored by Chaninat & Leeds)


1/2551 Thailand Supreme Court Opinion 81 (No. 650) 2008
Mrs. Somjit Muangngam vs. Mrs. Urai Sungkagoon

Land, Immovable Property

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming that the defendant constructed a bamboo fence which encroached, by 7 square wah, on the northern part of the plaintiff’s Thailand property, based on a map. In comparing the map as stated to the map from the plaintiff’s prior legal proceeding, it can be seen that the disputed land referred to in this case was a part of the land under contention in the former legal proceeding. In the previous proceeding, the court determined that the defendant had not encroached on the property of the plaintiff by the construction, and hence the land on the defendant’s side was land under the beneficial possession of the defendant, and not land under the beneficial possession of the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff’s legal action claiming that the section of the disputed land was a part of the land possessed by the plaintiff for a beneficial purpose was a re-examination of the same issues judged by the court already, and hence a duplicate legal action.



© Copyright Thailand Law Forum, All Rights Reserved
(except where the work is the individual works of the authors as noted)