Effect of non-payment.

Section 203 If the time to repay the debt is not fixed. I will deduce from all the circumstances it is not. You will be called to repay the debt immediately. And the debtors will repay their debts as soon as possible.

If it is scheduled. If the case is suspicious. You presume that the creditor will call for repayment before the time is not available. But the debtors will repay the debt early.

Section 204 If the debt is due And then the creditor warned the debtor. Debtors do not pay debts. The debtor has defaulted because he already warned.

If the repayment schedule is scheduled on the calendar day. And the debtors do not repay the debt. That the debtor has defaulted, without warning. The same procedure applies to pre-paid claims. The calendar can be calculated by the calendar from the date of notice.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 8107/2559.
When the plaintiff pays the medical fee f. Instead of the defendant, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff from the date the plaintiff paid. It is a debt that is scheduled to pay on the day of the calendar. When the defendant does not pay the default is not required to call. Defendant is liable to interest at the rate of 7.5 percent per annum from the date the plaintiff pays under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, paragraph two and Section 224, paragraph one, but the plaintiff's appeal for interest from February 2, 2010, the date of the defendant. Refusal to pay the plaintiff. The Supreme Court then requires the request.

Section 205 as long as the debt has not been committed because of one of the circumstances that the debtor is not responsible. As long as the debtor still can not find the name.

Section 206. The debtors have been called defaults, but the time to do the violation.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6282/2559.
Determining whether the three defendants are liable for interest from any date. The court must consider the provisions of the law which require debtors to default from time to time and to bear interest from that time. The case is a legal issue.

According to Section 206 of the law that in the case of debt but the violation. The defendant was the default of the violation of the defendant as a defendant to the plaintiff to be liable for damages to the plaintiff since the date of the violation. The second defendant, the employer of the defendant shall be liable to the defendant. In the result of the violation of the employee's employment under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 425, the second defendant must be subject to interest from the date of the violation as well. For the third defendant, the defendant. Have the obligation to be liable for any damages incurred under the insurance contract or conditions specified in the insurance policy. No offender or co-responsible for the offender. When the car insurance policy, but only the amount of liability that the third defendant must pay without specifying the same liability as the offender, the third defendant is not liable for interest from the date of the violation. The defendant is the third default date. And when the debt under the car insurance policy is not scheduled for the day of the calendar. The plaintiff has a claim to the third defendant liable for damages. Happened under the car insurance policy and the third defendant received a letter on demand on August 2, 2002, but the letter demanded that the plaintiff did not schedule the third defendant to pay the debt as follows: when the debt is not scheduled to repay. The plaintiff creditor will be called to repay the debt immediately and the defendant will be able to repay their debts in accordance with the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 203, when the third defendant received a letter request on August 2. Do not pay compensation. It can be considered that the defendant has defaulted 3 since August 3, 2002 and is liable for interest from that date.

Section 207. If the debtor requests repayment. And the creditors do not accept that payment without grounds to claim the law. You that the creditor has defaulted.

Section 208. The debtor will be asked to repay the debt directly.

But if the creditor shows to the debtor. Will not accept payment. In order to pay debts that need to be done by one of the creditors. The debtor will tell the creditor that it is prepared to pay the debt is ready. The creditors to repay it. This is enough. In this case, you say that the debtor's statement is always against the request for payment.

Section 209 If the time is fixed for the creditors. You will be asked to pay the debt, but when the creditors do that within the time limit.

Section 210. If the debtor is required to pay his own debt if the creditors pay back. Even if the creditor will be prepared to receive the debt as the debtor to do it. If you do not offer to pay back as you would have done. Creditors have been called default.

Section 211 at the time of the debtor to repay the debt. Or at the time the creditors make one. In the case provided in Section 209, if the debtor is not in a position to be able to repay the debt that the creditor is still default.

Section 212 if not scheduled to repay. If the debtor has the right to repay the debt before the time. The creditors are temporarily unable to repay the debt that he has to deal with it. Make the creditor default. Unless the debtor has given notice of repayment in a timely manner.

Section 213 If the debtor fails to pay his debts. Creditors will request the court to enforce the debt. Unless the condition of the debt is not open to do so.

When the condition of the debt is not open to force the debt. If the object of debt is to do any one. The creditor will request the court to order the third party to do so by giving the debtor the cost. But if the object of debt is to do any legal act. The court will order that the judgment be rendered in lieu of the debtor's intent.

The debt that is subject to a refrain. Creditors will demand to dismantle the already done by the debtor to pay. And to deal with the next.

The provisions in the preceding paragraphs Wounded to the right to call for damages.

Section 214 Subject to the provisions of Article 733, creditors have the right to make their own repayment from the debtor's property completely. Including money and other property that outsiders owed to the debtor.

Section 215. When the debtor fails to pay the debt, it shall be in accordance with the true intention of the debts. Creditors are entitled to compensation for damage caused by that.

Section 216 if by default Settlements become useless to creditors, creditors will refuse to repay. And to claim for non-payment.

Section 217. The debtor shall be liable for damage caused by negligence during his / her time of default. They will be responsible for the repayment becomes impossible because the accident occurred during the time of default. Unless the damage is even if the debt is timely, it would have to be there.

Section 218. If the repayment becomes impossible, it will be done because of one of the circumstances that the debtor is responsible for. You that the debtor will have to pay compensation to the creditors for any damages, but the failure to repay.

In case the repayment becomes impossible, but only partially. If the part that will be able to do that will be useless to the creditor. Creditors will not accept the debt to be able to do it. And to claim for not fully repayment of debt.

Section 219. If the repayment becomes impossible due to any circumstance that occurs after the debt has been incurred. And the debtor is not responsible for it. You that the debtor is out of the debt.

If the debt has already formed. Debtors become unable to repay debt. You are considered as a circumstance that makes the repayment of the debt impossible.

Section 220. The debtor shall be liable for the offense of his agent against the person whom he has used to pay that debt by the same amount as his own fault. However, the provisions of Article 373 shall not apply to such cases.

Section 221, the interest bearing debt. You will not be charged interest during the creditors.

Section 222. The claim for damages such as the usual happens, but the debt is not.

Creditors are entitled to claim. Even for damage, but special circumstances. If the involved parties have anticipated or should have expected such circumstances before then.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 5618/2559.
The plaintiff claimed to have paid to repair the work delivered by the defendant, which is 1,829,089.80 baht, when the defendant agreed to guarantee the contract for a year after delivery. Defendant must be liable for the defect of work to the plaintiff. But the problem is that the defendant will be liable for the defect to the plaintiff is how much money. It is a matter of determining the damage and damages that the plaintiff should receive. Case is a claim from the breach of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, which provides power to the court to determine the amount of money the debtor reimbursed. Not by the amount that the plaintiff calculated. When the plaintiff's debt to pay the pre-paid work to the defendant, it is also controversial whether the defendant is the contractor subcontractor is not. And the debt from the breach of the contract to file for the defendant to bankruptcy. The plaintiff did not bring the debt to the defendant filed a civil case. To the court in a civil case, the amount of money the defendant will have to pay the plaintiff before. The debt can not be determined by the course. The plaintiff has no authority to bring such debt to the defendant to bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy Act BE 2483 Section 9 (3)

Section 223 If the injured party has committed one of the offenses, You will need to pay compensation to the injured party as much as the circumstances are approximate. The important thing is that the damage has occurred because the party is the lesser cause.

The same way. You can use even if the fault of the damage is only to ignore the debtor to feel the danger of serious damage. The debtor knows or may not know. Or just no one at all. Or mitigate the damage. The provisions of Section 220 shall also apply mutatis mutandis.

Section 224 of that debt, you charge interest during the default period of seven percent per annum. If the creditor may be entitled to interest higher than that by other lawful causes. To continue to send interest there.

You do not charge interest on interest during the default.

Proof of damages other than that. You allow proof.

Section 225 If the debtor is required to pay compensation for the price of objects that have been damaged during the default. Or objects that can not be delivered because of any of the problems that occurred during the default. You will pay interest on the amount to be used as a compensation. From the time that the base of the price estimate. The same applies to the fact that the debtor is required to pay compensation for the price of the object because the object deteriorated during the time of default.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 8107/2559.
When the plaintiff pays the medical fee f. Instead of the defendant, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff from the date the plaintiff paid. It is a debt that is scheduled to pay on the day of the calendar. When the defendant does not pay the default is not required to call. Defendant is liable to interest at the rate of 7.5 percent per annum from the date the plaintiff pays under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, paragraph two and Section 224, paragraph one, but the plaintiff's appeal for interest from February 2, 2010, the date of the defendant. Refusal to pay the plaintiff. The Supreme Court then requires the request.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 7302/2559.
When the contract to buy and sell becomes a contract that does not schedule the payment of the calendar day and the defendant told the plaintiff to pay the debt within a new period of time. But the plaintiff does not follow. The plaintiff is in breach of contract, not to pay debts. Defendant has the right to make a deposit under Section 378 (2) and have the right to land for sale to other people. Not considered an agreement to terminate the purchase agreement with the plaintiff by default. Act on Unfair Contract, 1997, Section 7 stipulates that the contract is to provide anything as a deposit, if there is a case that must be forfeited. If the deposit is too high. The court will only reduce the damage to real damage. The plaintiff signed a contract to buy land to defend the defendant at a price of 1,400,000 baht deposit 500,000 baht or 35.71 percent of the land price. Compared with the price of the deposit. I can see that the deposit is too high. Should reduce the deposit to take down. The plaintiff and the defendant did not prove that the actual damage that the defendant received. But if the defendant sells and receives the land from the plaintiff, the money will be used to find other benefits. When the plaintiff breached the contract. The defendant entered into a contract to sell the land to the new buyer at a reduced price, should reduce the deposit to be confiscated to 200,000 baht, which is the amount that the defendant is likely to be damaged and the defendant must return a deposit of 300,000 baht to the plaintiff. The problem is in accordance with the provisions of the law giving the court the power to hear the case and the problem of public order. The Supreme Court has the power to lift itself up. For the defendant must return to the plaintiff. It is not the case that the defendant defaulted to pay interest under Section 224, paragraph one, both due to the plaintiff's breach of contract. Defendant is not required to pay interest of 300,000 baht to the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6282/2559.
Determining whether the three defendants are liable for interest from any date. The court must consider the provisions of the law which require debtors to default from time to time and to bear interest from that time. The case is a legal issue.

According to Section 206 of the law that in the case of debt but the violation. The defendant was the default of the violation of the defendant as a defendant to the plaintiff to be liable for damages to the plaintiff since the date of the violation. The second defendant, the employer of the defendant shall be liable to the defendant. In the result of the violation of the employee's employment under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 425, the second defendant must be subject to interest from the date of the violation as well. For the third defendant, the defendant. Have the obligation to be liable for any damages incurred under the insurance contract or conditions specified in the insurance policy. No offender or co-responsible for the offender. When the car insurance policy, but only the amount of liability that the third defendant must pay without specifying the same liability as the offender, the third defendant is not liable for interest from the date of the violation. The defendant is the third default date. And when the debt under the car insurance policy is not scheduled for the day of the calendar. The plaintiff has a claim to the third defendant liable for damages. Happened under the car insurance policy and the third defendant received a letter on demand on August 2, 2002, but the letter demanded that the plaintiff did not schedule the third defendant to pay the debt as follows: when the debt is not scheduled to repay. The plaintiff creditor will be called to repay the debt immediately and the defendant will be able to repay their debts in accordance with the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 203, when the third defendant received a letter request on August 2. Do not pay compensation. It can be considered that the defendant has defaulted 3 since August 3, 2002 and is liable for interest from that date.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 5618/2559.
The plaintiff claimed to have paid to repair the work delivered by the defendant, which is 1,829,089.80 baht, when the defendant agreed to guarantee the contract for a year after delivery. Defendant must be liable for the defect of work to the plaintiff. But the problem is that the defendant will be liable for the defect to the plaintiff is how much money. It is a matter of determining the damage and damages that the plaintiff should receive. Case is a claim from the breach of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, which provides power to the court to determine the amount of money the debtor reimbursed. Not by the amount that the plaintiff calculated. When the plaintiff's debt to pay the pre-paid work to the defendant, it is also controversial whether the defendant is the contractor subcontractor is not. And the debt from the breach of the contract to file for the defendant to bankruptcy. The plaintiff did not bring the debt to the defendant filed a civil case. To the court in a civil case, the amount of money the defendant will have to pay the plaintiff before. The debt can not be determined by the course. The plaintiff has no authority to bring such debt to the defendant to bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy Act BE 2483 Section 9 (3)

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4443/2559.
The plaintiff as the insurer is obliged under the insurance contract to pay medical expenses to the plaintiff and the aviator. And the right of the m. And the Air Force recruited from the liability of the car collided. When the car collided due to the negligence of the driver, the plaintiff's insurance and the defendant is not less than the defendant, the first defendant shall be liable for damages to the capital and half of the aircraft. Amount of medical expenses

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2621/2559.
The defendant purchased land from the plaintiffs. By agreement that the defendant can find a way out into the public road. Defendant will give way to another plot of land plots. The three plaintiffs are 3 meters wide. The agreement is not a contract but a consent. Defendant must be bound by the agreement. The text clearly indicates that the defendant will pledge to the land of the three plaintiffs. There is a message to that. Only to the three plaintiffs three families are only restrictions on the use of the plaintiff to the three plaintiffs can only be used. If the plaintiff sells or transfers the land to another person outside the family. Allow the defendant to close the exit. It is just another requirement in the act that gives rise to a consignment to the sale of goods that the law provides. Subsequent to the defendant brought the land purchased from the plaintiff to the three to dispose of and disputed on public roads, so the dispute is the plaintiff's plight that the three plaintiffs acquired by way of legal action. The defendant made the wall block the dispute is a breach of contract and cause the benefits of reduced or reduced convenience. According to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 1390, the plaintiff requested to dismantle the wall.

When the land of the plaintiffs on the east and the north, the public. Can use the boat to travel. The plaintiff's land has access to the public. The case is not required by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 1349, the plaintiffs claim to use the dispute as a necessity.

Defendant 1 bought the land, which had walls and some disputes from the defendant. By signing the agreement. The buyer has been informed since the date of the contract to buy and sell the land that the buyer must agree to the plaintiffs and the three passersby enter the land that has been purchased. Or the registration of the servitude of the land when the seller to notify. Show that the defendant knew that the land was under the mortgage of the land of the three plaintiffs. The defendant jointly transferred land 1, which is a bank robbery in good faith, the first defendant can not be raised as a defense to the three plaintiffs to the end. In addition, the contract is a contract to benefit third parties, the defendant is bound to the contract. The defendant and the defendant, therefore, had to dismantle the wall that blocked the dispute.

The second defendant is a housing estate juristic person, which is required by law to transfer the property which is the utilities, including the dispute with the defendant, the land is only for maintenance. Is not a third party defendant, the defendant must be bound by the agreement with the plaintiff to the plaintiff. And the plaintiffs have the power to sue the second defendant registered the burden. In order to maintain and use the servitude. Under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 1391, paragraph one.

Defendant transferred the land to the defendant to the first and second defendant to the defendant, not the owner of the property anymore. Condition of the debt is not open to the plaintiffs, the three defendants to register the dispute as a pledge to the land of the plaintiffs. If the defendants 1 and 2 can not be registered as a dispute on the plaintiff's land plots of the three. The defendant is a breach. Liability for damages to the three plaintiffs.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3083/2559.
Section 224, paragraph one, states that "the debt. You charge interest during the default period of seven percent per annum. If the creditor may be entitled to interest higher than that by other lawful causes. To continue to send interest. "When the compensation for medical services, the plaintiff demanded from the defendant owed money. Defendant is liable to pay interest during the time of default to the plaintiff. When there is no law that the plaintiff is entitled to interest higher than the rate of 7.5 percent per year, then the plaintiff is entitled to interest from the defendant at only 7.5 percent per year.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1304/2559.
The plaintiff who purchased the land from the auction is the payer for the purchase of land, which is assessed under Section 40 (8) to the real estate seller. Section 50 (5) and the deductible tax shall be paid to the competent official registrar of rights and juristic acts at the time of registration of the transfer of land. The tax amount of 5,486,200 baht that the plaintiff claimed in this case. The money that the payer has withholding tax, sent to the competent official under Section 52 paragraph two. Later, the court ordered the revocation of the auction. And the Enforcement Officer has a letter dated December 9, 2008 to the Bangkok land official. To cancel the registration of transfer of ownership of land to the buyer of the property and return the contract to the original. The plaintiff did not buy land from the auction. And no obligation to send withholding tax to the competent. Filing a tax return from the defendant in this case is not a refund of taxes and taxes that are deducted at the time of payment and then sent in excess of the tax should be. The obligation to file a petition within three years from the last day of filing the tax as provided in Section 27 ter, paragraph one, the plaintiff is entitled to a refund of tax 5,486,200 baht from the defendant.

Before the court finally ordered the revocation of the auction. The plaintiff is responsible for delivering the withholding tax. And the defendant received tax money that has been delivered by the legal right. The court has finally ordered the revocation of the auction, which is the reason behind it and not the cause of the penalty. Defendant has no liability to refund tax and interest to the plaintiff. But later the auction was canceled. And the plaintiff filed a petition on January 29, 2009 call the defendant to return the money. Case is owed money. Defendant is not the default and not pay the interest rate 7.5 percent per annum from January 29, 2009 onwards, under Section 204 paragraph one and Section 224 paragraph one, not from the date of the plaintiff. Payment

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1137/2559.
The plaintiff gave the defendant a manager of the financial and accounting department of the plaintiff to collect the check and stamp of the plaintiff and the defendant is the one who took the form of a disputed counterfeit copy of the check. The plaintiff to charge the account of the plaintiff up to 43 copies for a period of 3 years, as this shows that the plaintiff is not careful to keep the custody. The custody dispute form and check the seal of the plaintiff. There are no measures to check to prevent the counterfeit copies of the check, the signature of the payer and use the stamp of the plaintiff stamped into the dispute, the plaintiff to withdraw money from the third defendant, but any third defendant. Submit the current account of the plaintiff to the plaintiff every month. If the plaintiff has a good measure. I know the abnormality in the use of check out of the plaintiff's account and can be fixed in a faster time. But the plaintiff did not check until the time came to 3 years to know the violation. The plaintiff has contributed to the damage caused by the damage to the plaintiff. The circumstances are approximately the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 223, paragraph one, 438 and 442.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 204/2559.
Voluntary insurance policy that the defendant sent 2 by the order and the plaintiff claimed the document as a witness to the liability for damage to the body or the excess health of the maximum limit under the Act of 100,000 baht per person. The liability of the defendant 2 in the damage caused by the insurance policy for victims of the car. The Ministerial Regulation prescribes the amount insured by type, type and size of the car, 2004, which came into force on April 1, 2003. Clause 3. The sum insured for damage to the following persons (1 Fifty thousand baht per person For damage to the body or health, except under (2) and (2) one hundred thousand baht per person. For any damage to the body or the health of any of the following: ...... (g) permanent disability The plaintiff testified only that the condition of the plaintiff can not return to the beauty of the profession. There is no evidence to show that the injury suffered by the plaintiff was severe or the results can not be fully occupied professionally. Can not hear that the plaintiff's permanent disability. The liability of the defendant in the car insurance policy is only 50,000 baht when combined with damage to life, body or health 100,000 baht and damage to property with a limit of 1,000,000 baht per visit. The voluntary policy that the plaintiff had to pay for motorcycle repair by the Court of First Instance is 2,385 baht, then the total is 152,385 baht at the Court of Appeal to the defendant. 2, the full liability of the defendant to the liability of 1, not with the opinion of the Supreme Court. And the plaintiff sued the two defendants jointly to pay the interest from the day following the date of the violation, but the defendant is only a second defendant to be liable to indemnity for damage in accordance with the terms of the policy, not a violation or need. Joint liability with the offender as a debtor. When an insurance policy is imposed, only the amount of damage is liable. Do not specify the same liability as the offender, the defendant is not liable for interest from the date of the violation. When the debt under the insurance contract is not scheduled to repay the calendar day and it does not appear that the plaintiff demanded the defendant to pay the debt when. It also does not hold that the defendant 2 was the default before the plaintiff sued the defendant to the second defendant to bear interest from the date of the lawsuit.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 13070/2558.
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit to the defendant issued a letter of credit. The resolution of the counterclaim was paid according to the amount that is correct. The plaintiff agrees to pay the overdue central expenses. When the plaintiff settled the debt in accordance with the Court of Appeal 1, then the debt is suspended. The plaintiff has the right to demand that the defendant issue a letter of credit as well. The plaintiff wishes to bring this book to the land official to request registration of the transfer of the apartment. The defendant issued a letter of guarantee, thus giving rise to the plaintiffs to transfer the apartment. It is the sole act of the defendant under Section 149 of the Civil and Commercial Code. If the condition of the debt does not open the channel. The court would like to order the judgment on behalf of the intent of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 213, paragraph two.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 13068/2558.
According to the plaintiff's indictment, the defendant issued a certificate of debt relief. The defendant issued a certificate of debt relief. The plaintiff will pay the central debt to complete. Even if the request is filed and the counterclaim of the plaintiff does not say. When the plaintiff has paid the full amount, then the defendant issued a certificate of debt relief. But because the defendant has filed a counterclaim for the plaintiff to settle the debt and the court finally sentenced the plaintiff to pay the central defense to the defendant when the plaintiff paid the central court in accordance with the judgment to the defendant, then the debt is suspended. The plaintiff has the right to claim the defendant to issue a letter of credit as well. The defendant issued a certificate of debt relief, thus giving rise to the plaintiffs to transfer the apartment. It is the only one act of the defendant in the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 149. Therefore, in the forced repayment if the condition of the debt is not open, the court would like to order the judgment on behalf of the intent. Section 213, paragraph two, which is a reasonable order for the picture to enforce the case. Condominium Act, BE 2522, Section 29, paragraph three

Judgment of the Supreme Court 204/2559.
Voluntary insurance policy that the defendant sent 2 by the order and the plaintiff claimed the document as a witness to the liability for damage to the body or the excess health of the maximum limit under the Act of 100,000 baht per person. The liability of the defendant 2 in the damage caused by the insurance policy for victims of the car. The Ministerial Regulation prescribes the amount insured by type, type and size of the car, 2004, which came into force on April 1, 2003. Clause 3. The sum insured for damage to the following persons (1 Fifty thousand baht per person For damage to the body or health, except under (2) and (2) one hundred thousand baht per person. For any damage to the body or the health of any of the following: ...... (g) permanent disability The plaintiff testified only that the condition of the plaintiff can not return to the beauty of the profession. There is no evidence to show that the injury suffered by the plaintiff was severe or the results can not be fully occupied professionally. Can not hear that the plaintiff's permanent disability. The liability of the defendant in the car insurance policy is only 50,000 baht when combined with damage to life, body or health 100,000 baht and damage to property with a limit of 1,000,000 baht per visit. The voluntary policy that the plaintiff had to pay for motorcycle repair by the Court of First Instance is 2,385 baht, then the total is 152,385 baht at the Court of Appeal to the defendant. 2, the full liability of the defendant to the liability of 1, not with the opinion of the Supreme Court. And the plaintiff sued the two defendants jointly to pay the interest from the day following the date of the violation, but the defendant is only a second defendant to be liable to indemnity for damage in accordance with the terms of the policy, not a violation or need. Joint liability with the offender as a debtor. When an insurance policy is imposed, only the amount of damage is liable. Do not specify the same liability as the offender, the defendant is not liable for interest from the date of the violation. When the debt under the insurance contract is not scheduled to repay the calendar day and it does not appear that the plaintiff demanded the defendant to pay the debt when. It also does not hold that the defendant 2 was the default before the plaintiff sued the defendant to the second defendant to bear interest from the date of the lawsuit.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 13070/2558.
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit to the defendant issued a letter of credit. The resolution of the counterclaim was paid according to the amount that is correct. The plaintiff agrees to pay the overdue central expenses. When the plaintiff settled the debt in accordance with the Court of Appeal 1, then the debt is suspended. The plaintiff has the right to demand that the defendant issue a letter of credit as well. The plaintiff wishes to bring this book to the land official to request registration of the transfer of the apartment. The defendant issued a letter of guarantee, thus giving rise to the plaintiffs to transfer the apartment. It is the sole act of the defendant under Section 149 of the Civil and Commercial Code. If the condition of the debt does not open the channel. The court would like to order the judgment on behalf of the intent of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 213, paragraph two.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 13068/2558.
According to the plaintiff's indictment, the defendant issued a certificate of debt relief. The defendant issued a certificate of debt relief. The plaintiff will pay the central debt to complete. Even if the request is filed and the counterclaim of the plaintiff does not say. When the plaintiff has paid the full amount, then the defendant issued a certificate of debt relief. But because the defendant has filed a counterclaim for the plaintiff to settle the debt and the court finally sentenced the plaintiff to pay the central defense to the defendant when the plaintiff paid the central court in accordance with the judgment to the defendant, then the debt is suspended. The plaintiff has the right to claim the defendant to issue a letter of credit as well. The defendant issued a certificate of debt relief, thus giving rise to the plaintiffs to transfer the apartment. It is the only one act of the defendant in the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 149. Therefore, in the forced repayment if the condition of the debt is not open, the court would like to order the judgment on behalf of the intent. Section 213, paragraph two, which is a reasonable order for the picture to enforce the case. Condominium Act, BE 2522, Section 29, paragraph three

Judgment of the Supreme Court 10955/2558.
According to the Veterans Administration Act BE 2510, Section 25 requires the Director of the Veterans Assistance Organization to administer the business and in accordance with Section 26 in a third party. The director acts on behalf of the Veterans Administration and acts as agent. It can delegate authority to any agent or person to perform specific business operations. The defendants both opened a deposit account to the plaintiff's employees, who are clerks in the financial unit by applying for a savings account. Issued by Colonel Prof. without the fact that Colonel Prof. is the representative of the plaintiff's director or not, the case is not in compliance. The Veterans Administration Organization, BE 2510 (1967), issued a copy of the ID card of the government employee, Colonel Prof. Fake. And a sample of the signature card to the employees of the two defendants to check their signature. Both defendants check the opening of savings account and documents and then open a savings account using the account name. The "War Veterans Organization". The defendant did not ask the plaintiff to open an account or not. The four payers did not sign the sample of the signatures in front of the employees of the two defendants is considered defective of the two defendants. The negligence in the process of opening the account of the two defendants, but the employee of the plaintiff's office brought documents to open the account to the two defendants with the employees of the two defendants fail to check the good. Before Before opening an account to the road, the act of deliberately violating the plaintiff's actions is more serious than the actions of the two defendants, which is just negligence. After the two defendants opened a deposit account to the plaintiff, then the plaintiff to pay the plaintiff to pay the plaintiff to pay the plaintiff's account to the two defendants open to the plaintiff's total of 73,462,420.16 baht for a total of 5 years. That shows that. The internal audit system of the plaintiff is not good enough. The plaintiff abandoned the cause of the opportunity to fraud easy. If the plaintiff has a good review. I will not corruption forever for a period of 5 years, and the damage would not be much. The plaintiff negligently negligently. Case can be considered. The plaintiff contributed more damage than the two defendants. Can not force the defendant to pay damages to the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 10534/2558.
P. 46 stipulates that In judgments on civil cases, the court must hold the facts as appearing in the criminal judgment. The fact is that the hearing is terminated in criminal cases. Defendant recklessly The fact that the deceased was negligent? And who is more reckless, the fact that it must be taken into consideration in the determination of the claim. The Court of First Instance has not yet ruled and the defendant has already appealed to the Civil and Commercial Code. Section 47, paragraph one, stipulates that the civil lawsuit must be in accordance with the provisions of the law on liability of civil individuals, regardless of whether. The defendant must be guilty of misconduct. Civil and Commercial Provisions Section 442 is intended to apply the provisions of Section 223 to apply mutatis mutandis, and Section 438 of the Act. How will the compensation be used by any place? The court should determine the circumstances and seriousness of the offense. In order to determine how much the court will have to consider the evidence of the plaintiff, the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs and the defendant that the defendant or the lesser the negligence of the less and how. It will be in accordance with the existing power lawfully with the provisions of the law.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 10514 - 10515/2558.
The contract between the plaintiff and the defendant has agreed that the demolition of the existing building and construction of a new building in accordance with the layout of the lease. It is scheduled to start construction and construction time to be completed. The plaintiff can not start construction. The rental area has been registered by the Fine Arts Department as a historic site after the lease. The demolition of the old building and the construction of the new building of the plaintiff to meet the lease is not possible. It is considered that the repayment by the contract is impossible due to one of the circumstances that occurred after the debt and the debtor is not responsible. The debt relief from the repayment of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 219, paragraph one, the plaintiff can not be sued to force the defendant to comply with the contract and call for compensation. But the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant is a reciprocal contract, which the contractor is obliged to repay the debt even though the defendant will be released from the debt, but the defendant is entitled to a repayment. Section 372, paragraph one, the plaintiff is entitled to the payment of the rent paid on the contract date returned from the defendant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 18042/2557.
The plaintiff and the defendant agreed to determine the liability of the contractual performance under the contract to explore and appraise the defendant's property in violation of the contract for survey and appraisal of property A because not reported and appraised property as collateral properly. real The plaintiff's damages from the loan to the bank than it should be under the control of the plaintiff's evaluation company. The plaintiff claims damages equal to the amount of loan that the plaintiff approved the loan. It does not appear that the borrower has defaulted. The resolution stated that. Normal Installment Loans The company has not yet paid for the debt. If the debtor debt repayment debt collateral. The company is out of debt. The plaintiff found that the case that the borrower continues to pay the debt to the plaintiff has no damage. Only the risk that the borrower will not repay. When the plaintiff does not prove that the plaintiff is otherwise damaged or will benefit from the money for this purpose and will be more advantage than the interest on the loan to the plaintiff claims damages of 300,000 baht is high. too

Contract for surveying and valuation of property determine the duty of the company to assess and survey the property to complete in accordance with the form and procedures prescribed by the bank. The appraisal form is the appraisal price, which is the price for land evaluation per square wah and the building price. The valuation is based on comparative data. Whether it is the appraisal price or the price as collateral, the defendant is obliged to give the opinion in accordance with the standards and professional ethics, so that the plaintiff to consider the loan properly. The defendant 1 assessed the price of 10,844,626 baht as collateral price of 22,000,000 baht by comparison with the same project. Appraiser valuation of the plaintiff agreed that the defendant 1 appraised value as collateral higher than the appraised value of the bank. 127.41 The appraised value is 8,081,085 Baht The price is THB 9,674,000 as collateral against the same project. In addition, it appears that other appraisers and the defendant had previously appraised the project. The assessed value of the collateral is not more than 30%, especially the defendant, the first appraisal value is not more than 20%. The first defendant assessed the value of the collateral to 22,000,000 Baht, so the valuation of the collateral value exceeds the value of 100% is unusual. The defendant did not evaluate the price as a guarantee of professional standards is a breach of contract.

Credit The plaintiff must analyze the data to approve the loan. The asset assessment of the plaintiff must verify how credible information is. Is the price of the defendant a good assessment? The debtor's ability to repay debt. The plaintiff proposed the credit committee to analyze the loan. Do not use the appraisal value of the defendant, but only. For credit approval. When the plaintiff received a report from the defendant that the valuation, which is the cost price and the price as collateral, the market price difference of more than 100 percent is unusual. But still approve loans to borrowers. The plaintiff must be negligent if the defendant is liable for all the difference in the loan, it would transfer the burden of the plaintiff to the collateral valuer. Both are the plaintiff's fault that analyzes the error and does not verify the financial credibility of the customer.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 16469/2557.
Settlement of debts that are not possible under Section 219, meaning that. At the time of the debt. The object of debt is to pay the debt. However, there are certain circumstances that arise after the debt is due to debtors can not pay debts to the creditors absolutely and permanently. The debtors will be released from debt.

The defendant entered into a contract to sell the condominium to the plaintiff. The financial institutions that gave credit to the defendant were suspended from business. It is not the circumstances that make the construction of the defendant's apartment impossible. It is only a failure that the defendant must seek new sources of capital. The defendant may have to spend more time on the construction of condominiums and more expensive than ever. It does not impede the defendant to build a condominium completely. The financial institutions that gave credit to the defendant were shut down, not the circumstances that resulted in the construction of the condominium became impossible. The defendant did not emerge from the duty to build a condominium and then transferred the apartment to the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 15948/2557.
The cassava processing contract 11 is an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant that the delivery date of cassava line, as the plaintiff will deliver each time the defendant fails to deliver on time by the plaintiff. The defendant did not agree to pay the fine to the plaintiff. When the defendant failed to deliver a cassava line to the plaintiff and did not terminate the contract to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is entitled to a fine from the defendant in accordance with the contract, even if the plaintiff to terminate the contract after more than seven years, the contract will not be considered as the time to deliver the work is not significant. Because the contract does not require the plaintiff to terminate the contract to the defendant before the right to a fine. But the plaintiff did not terminate the contract within a reasonable time, but abandoned until the fine amount is unreasonably high. The plaintiff contributed to the damage caused by neglect, no treatment, wipe or mitigate damage. The court has the power to reduce the number of cases under Section 223

Judgment of the Supreme Court 13675/2557.
Section 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that in civil cases. The court must hold the facts as appearing in the criminal case. In this case, the fact that the hearing in the criminal case is only that. Both the deceased and the defendant are each negligent. But whoever is less careful is not present. Both the plaintiff and the defendant can be sure that anyone who is negligent. And should be compensated by the other party or not.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 14701/2557.
The Fourth Circuit Court ruled that the defendant issued a regulation to individuals who use the golf course of the defendant. Do not use a golf club that has a far hit, such as a clubhead. Do not set higher than 45 mm on the first floor and scheduled to open from 8 to 20.30 clock is the protection of the plaintiff's rights under Section. 421, 1337, 1337 and 1374, to restrain the defendant from exercising his right to cause damage to the plaintiff. The restriction of the freedom of occupation under the Thai Constitution of 2007, Section 5 and Section 43 paragraph one, and the judgment to force the defendant as the operator of the golf practice field directly to act and to issue regulations. It is not a force outside the condition of the debt to open the channel.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6010/2557.
Plaintiff purchased the Chiang Mai Tower from the auction of the enforcement. When to register the transfer of ownership. Must have a letter of credit from the defendant to the land office in accordance with the Condominium Act, Section 29, paragraph two, which if no certificate of debt relief from the defendant to the plaintiff may not. To proceed to register the transfer of the apartment to the plaintiff. As such, the defendant must issue a letter of guarantee to the plaintiff. It is considered that any defendant must do to have the effect of changing, transferring or suspending the right to register the right in the apartment. Acting as a single act under Section 149, when the defendant refused to issue a certificate of debt relief and the plaintiff sued the court to order the defendant to issue a letter of guarantee to the plaintiff. If the defendant ignored the action. So it is preferable that the court will order to hold the verdict on behalf of the defendant's intent as requested by the plaintiff under Section 213

Judgment of the Supreme Court 7426 - 7427/2557.
P. 46 stipulates that in a civil case, the court must hold the facts as appearing in the criminal case. It does not appear that there are provisions of law that bring the facts of the verdict of civil cases to terminate in criminal cases. The facts in the civil case that the deceased is a negligence, so it will only be heard in the compensation claim that the plaintiff should receive compensation only from the defendant. The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the fact that the civil case was heard in a criminal case. The dead are reckless. The dead are not injured. Then the sentence of the father who died as a plaintiff. Do not like

Judgment of the Supreme Court 238/2557
Although the land redistribution dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant will be caused by the illegal actions of the defendant, who illegally pledged land and land disputes. Forge the signature of the plaintiff's authorized officer in the power of attorney and power of attorney with the seal of the plaintiff in the power of attorney. Then together with the second defendant brought the document to register the redemption land mortgage law land dispute with the Land Office Chonburi. The offender and the plaintiff sued to be sued for the revocation of the illegal mortgage redemption. However, such an occurrence because the plaintiff kept the mortgage contract, land and land dispute disputes are not good. The defendant, a plaintiff's loan officer, has the opportunity to get the documents to register the redemption of mortgage land dispute. Hold it because the plaintiff has negligence. And the fact that the defendant 2 listed land dispute to the third defendant by the defendant to the land dispute 3 in good faith and pay the defendant and the third defendant registered the land dispute 4 defendant by the defendant to the mortgage. Land disputes in good faith and pay the same, so if the court ruled that the redemption of land mortgage dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant is void. Each of the four defendants jointly denounced the act of redemption land disputes and jointly registered as a plaintiff mortgagee land dispute as it was the first order. It will affect the third and fourth defendants, who are the transferee and mortgagee of the land dispute in good faith and pay for sure. Because the mortgagee of the latter to enforce his rights to damage to the previous mortgage is not under Section 731. In the appeal class, the plaintiff also stated in the appeal of the plaintiff, with the intent to show that. The plaintiff does not wish to request a revocation of the land dispute between the defendant 2 and the defendant 3, or request to revoke the mortgage law between the defendant 3 and the defendant 4 because the plaintiff. The 2 still have the ownership of the land dispute, so it has the power to register the third defendant and the third defendant has the power to land the dispute to register the defendant to the plaintiff as well, so it is equal to the plaintiff. Agreed to the rights of the third and fourth defendants as the transfer of land disputes and the mortgagee of the disputed land.

The plaintiff has a negligence, so there is no way to maintain the plaintiff's rights as the first plaintiff's land disputes, without prejudice to the rights of the defendants 3 and 4, so the plaintiff has the first claim in the first. Request that the court judge that the land mortgage dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant 2 is void and the revocation of the mortgage redemption law land dispute. The plaintiff is the first plaintiff disputed land. It is the case that the condition of the debt is not open to do so under Section 213 paragraph one.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 19391/2013.
The defendant did not practice or can not comply with the contract to buy and sell to the plaintiff. Because the defendant transferred the dispute to a third party, which is considered a fault, but the defendant's own party. The defendant is still liable for the registration of the transfer of land dispute to the plaintiff at the end of the lawsuit. There may be a revocation or amendment of the registration of the land dispute is the name of the defendant. And to register the transfer of ownership to the plaintiff. Case is not the condition of the debt does not open the box to the defendant must not be liable to conduct the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 19385/2013.
The plaintiff made a total of 26 cars from the defendant. 2 The plaintiff made a contract to sell 26 cars to the Court of Justice. Deliveries by May 31, 2006, the defendant delivered two cars to the plaintiff for the first twoteen 16 cars for the second installment of 5 cars, and the plaintiff has delivered to the Office of the Judiciary. Then the defendant failed to deliver the other 5 cars to the plaintiff, the case where the defendant does not pay the debt to the true needs of the debt. Plaintiffs claim to claim compensation for damages caused by the failure to pay the debt under Section 215, but the compensation for damages, Section 222 divided the damage into two cases. Under the first paragraph. Damage like normal happens, but not repayment. The second case under paragraph two is a special accident. If the involved parties have anticipated or should have expected such circumstances before then. When the facts of the defendant 2 already know that the plaintiff bought the car from the defendant 2 to sell to the Office of the Judiciary. And before that, the defendant delivered the car to the plaintiff's 16 cars, the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 2 does not appear that the exact date of delivery of the car. It appears that the order. "Credit payment 30 days from the date of car delivery" is the case that the time to deliver the car is not set. The plaintiff would call the defendant to deliver the second vehicle immediately and the defendant would like to deliver the remaining car immediately as well as the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 203. The plaintiff has a letter to the defendant. I have 10 cars that are important. The plaintiff notified the verdict of the vehicle by May 20, 2006, but the plaintiff was notified that the second defendant to deliver only five vehicles, the remaining to be received next month, causing the plaintiff to be damaged. If the car can not be delivered in time by May 29, 2006, then the plaintiff's help is urgent. The plaintiff to determine the exact time the defendant delivered the vehicle to the plaintiff by May 29, 2006 as follows: When the defendant knew that the plaintiff bought the car from the defendant, the plaintiff is bound to deliver the car to the office. Court of Justice defendant 2 would understand the meaning of the letter that if the defendant does not deliver 5 cars to the plaintiff within the deadline. The plaintiff will be damaged by the plaintiff will be liable for damages to the Office of the Judiciary under the contract. Even later, May 25, 2006, the defendant 2 will have a letter to the plaintiff that the defendant can not deliver another 5 cars to the plaintiff because the second defendant misplaced the order. The error to deliver the car to the plaintiff by May 29, 2006, and the plaintiff has a letter dated May 30, 2006 to the second defendant, the defendant that the plaintiff will be damaged by the fine. Office of the Judiciary Asked the defendant to deliver the remaining 5 cars to the plaintiff by May 31, 2006 and insisted that the second defendant to deliver the car immediately to avoid subsequent damage in the defendant's fault. 2, but the defendant will be ignored, so the defendant must be considered as a breach of contract when the plaintiff called the defendant to deliver the last two cars. The defendant was not guilty since the second defendant was unable to deliver the car. According to the circumstances, it is clear that the defendant knows that the plaintiff has a debt that must be paid by delivering the car to the Office of the Judiciary. And the debt that the defendant will either expect or should be expected before the second defendant breached the contract that the plaintiff would be damaged by the Office of the Judiciary to adjust the contract because the defendant does not pay the debt. The car to the plaintiff within the defendant, the defendant will be liable for damage to the plaintiff was the Court of Appeal fine of 1,800,000 baht when the penalty is owed.The plaintiff has the right to charge interest from the defendant in the default of 7.5 percent per year under Section 224 paragraph one.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 18292/2013.
The defendant will know that the plaintiff's business to buy products for sale to the plaintiff's customers anyway. But it is unlikely that the plaintiff will agree to sell products to customers before. Is there any obligation to pay a fine to the customer of the plaintiff? The defendant did not deliver the goods to the plaintiff under the contract of sale. Cause the plaintiff to pay a fine to the plaintiff's customers. It is not expected damage that must always occur, which can be regarded as damages in special circumstances, which the defendant will be liable when the expected or should be expected such a circumstance. According to the evidence of the plaintiff can not hear whether the defendant knew or expected or should have expected that if the defendant did not send the goods to the plaintiff. The plaintiff must pay a fine to the customer. Defendant is not liable for this damage under Section 222 paragraph two.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 17868/2556.
When considering the driving circumstances of both parties, whoever is less careful than before. If the defendant is cautious enough to see the motorcycle must be seen at a drive and slow down the speed of the collision is not the same. A. A motorcycle driving back to the road, it must. Stop the car to see if there is a drive to the right. When it is safe to drive out. Both the defendant and A. have not done. The fact is that the defendant 1 and A. The negligence is not less than. The plaintiff and the defendant can not claim damages under Section 442, Section 223, defendant 2, the defendant is not liable to the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 8811/2556.
The loan agreement between the plaintiff and the MP did not set the repayment period. The plaintiff will call the defendant to pay the debt immediately under Section 203 paragraph one, and the time that the lender may enforce claims. The term begins on the day following the date of the loan agreement and when the death of the plaintiff before the claim can not use the age of the plaintiff's claim, because the claim to the estate, which is not yet scheduled. When the inheritance of death before it. Creditors must file lawsuits to enforce their claims. Within a year of knowing the death of the estate. When the plaintiff testified that the MP died on December 1, 2005, and the plaintiff was helping the funeral. The plaintiff knows about the death of the MP since December 2005, the plaintiff brought the case to the defendant as the descendant of the MP to repay the loan on February 14, 2008, expires 1 year from the date the plaintiff knows. The death of the plaintiff sued the plaintiff's death under Section 1754 paragraph three.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6698/2556.
The agreement to buy and sell land and buildings is a reciprocal agreement. The six defendants are obliged to repay the plaintiff's debt is to build a townhouse and transfer the ownership of land. And even if the contract is not scheduled to finish construction. But it is evident that the six defendants will have to carry out the construction of the townhouse in the land to the plaintiff under the contract to complete and transfer the ownership in a timely manner. When the plaintiff paid the contract payment. Only the last payment to be paid to the six defendants on the land transfer. But the six defendants returned for a long time without completing the construction of the townhouse. Separation of title deed And transfer of land and townhouse to the plaintiff under the contract. The six defendants are not in a position to pay the debt under Section 211 of the plaintiff is not a default and the defendant is the sixth defendant to sell. The six defendants have no right to claim the plaintiff's transfer.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 20658 - 21837/2555.
The damage to the cooperative that the defendant paid to the plaintiff at 1191 delayed damages, but special circumstances under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, paragraph two, the plaintiff in 1191 must show that the defendant had expected or should have expected. In advance of the circumstances that the plaintiff at 1191 will be damaged. When the plaintiff at 1191 did not show that the defendant had expected or should have anticipated enough damage. This is not the case with the Central Labor Court.

Each of the plaintiffs has the right to receive from the wage adjustment under the terms of employment, by default, without wages. It is not the plaintiff has the right to charge interest during the default of 15 percent per annum under the Labor Protection Act 1998, Section 9, paragraph one, but the debt is entitled to interest in. Under default at the rate of 7.5 percent per year under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 224, paragraph one.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 15641/2555.
The plaintiff signed a contract to hire a defendant to build a civil servant housing under the plaintiff. The facts do not appear that the plaintiff notified the defendant before or during the contract that the plaintiff to the plaintiff's civil servants to live immediately when the defendant built the building was completed within the time specified in the contract, because the plaintiff has a burden. Pay for house rent When the defendant did not complete the contract. The plaintiff extended the time to defend the other three times, but did not notify the defendant that the defendant did not complete the construction of the building, the plaintiff must pay the rent to the plaintiff's civil servants as a salary. The rent is not such a compensation for damage as usual, but the default. It is a compensation for damage caused by special circumstances. The plaintiff will call from the defendant when the defendant has expected or should have expected such circumstances before the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, paragraph two, but the plaintiff did not show that the defendant expected or should have seen. Special circumstances. Defendant is not liable for damages in this section to the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 10625/2555.
The plaintiff sued the defendant to pay the debt of the use of credit cards, and then defaulted not repay. The defendant did not deny that it was not a default. The only thing that the commission of credit between the plaintiff and the defendant is still enforceable. Because the plaintiff did not have a notice to the defendant pay the debt and terminate the contract. The plaintiff has no power to sue. But the termination of the contract with the default is different in each case is that the debt contract. When the debtor fails to pay the debt. The creditor shall have the right to enforce the debt under Section 213 or may terminate the contract under Section 386 to Section 388, but the creditor will choose. To mean that if the plaintiff did not terminate the contract, then the defendant has no right to pay the debt owed to the plaintiff, so when the plaintiff sued the defendant to pay the debt is scheduled for the calendar day. The defendant did not pay on time. Defendant is not the default of the warning or notice of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, paragraph two, which is a dispute over the rights of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has the right to sue the defendant to pay such debt without notice before suing.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 15383/2555.
The plaintiff has a written notice to the defendant to register the mortgage and receive the money plus interest on the date of the mortgage redemption at the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration to the defendant and the defendant has already received. When the plaintiff's appointment to the land office, but the defendant did not go. The defendant became a default under Section 207 of the plaintiff has the power to force the defendant to repay the loan of 200,000 Baht plus interest on the date of registration, transfer and redeem the mortgage to the plaintiff by the plaintiff does not need to deposit money. The court or deposited money at the Office of the Civil and Commercial Section 333, however, because the defendant is considered a debtor to the mortgage to the plaintiff, which must be processed. Whether land a job The circumstances of the case that the defendant refused to receive the debt by the amount of the early. The plaintiff has a written notice to the defendant to repay the mortgage and the mortgage. It is a request to pay debts in accordance with Section 208, paragraph two, and in this case, the plaintiff does not have to pay the defendant's domicile under Section 324.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 7195/2555.
The contract that the plaintiff employed the defendant to produce iron as a contract of employment under Section 587. At the same time, it is a reciprocal contract under Section 369 when the employment contract between the plaintiff and the defendant has already broken. The plaintiff and the defendant must return to the position as it is the same as the Civil and Commercial Code 391 paragraph one. Section 391, paragraph four also states that. The exercise of the right to terminate the contract to wound up the right to claim damages. Which means that. The termination of the contract does not invalidate the liability that the debtor has established before, that is, if the debtor has a liability that does not pay the debt causing the creditors to be damaged. Creditors have the right to claim for damages as provided by Section 213, 215, 216, when the facts are heard, terminate the judgment of the Court of First Instance. Defendant has made the iron floor as plaintiff ordered to complete the plaintiff but the defendant failed to pay the wage demanded by the defendant. The plaintiff was the default before the termination of the contract. Defendant will have the right to claim damages, even after the defendant plaintiff to terminate the contract. And even this case, the defendant did not deliver the finished iron floor to the plaintiff. The defendant separated the aluminum from the copper rod, bringing the heat produced on the iron floor, leaving no iron on the floor. It also does not hold that the plaintiff has been employed by the defendant to the defendant is entitled to the value of the work under Section 391 paragraph three, as the Court of Appeal. But the defendant has shown this damage in the testimony. The court would like to determine the damages to the defendant. Then deducted with the price of copper rods heated to the defendant must pay the plaintiff before. According to the principle of compensation agreement as provided in Section 392, Section 369

Judgment of the Supreme Court 12048/2553.
The land that the defendant rented was partially expropriated by the expropriation of land for the construction of industrial ring road. The plaintiff was forced by the plaintiff that the plaintiff entered into a contract of sale of land was expropriated with the Department of Public Works buyer. In order to receive compensation for the land being expropriated. Act on the expropriation of immovable property in 1987 is not the case that the plaintiff is going to contract or not. The repayment of the plaintiff's lease as a lessor becomes partially impossible. Therefore, it can not be considered that the plaintiff is in breach of the lease when the defendant wishes to lease the remaining land. But the defendant ignored the cancellation of the lease of the land was expropriated. When the plaintiff's termination of the lease was expropriated, then the plaintiff would be required to force the defendant to cancel the lease. And the plaintiff was not damaged compensation. Although the Department of Public Works will put the property at the Government Savings Bank with interest on deposits. But the compensation will be paid to the plaintiff after the registration of rights and legal acts. The plaintiff as the seller will receive compensation and interest when the conditions are met, so the interest of the plaintiffs will be received from the Government Savings Bank is different from the plaintiff claims that the defendant has the right to claim. Claims to the defendant pay interest at the rate equal to the interest rate of fixed deposit at the Savings Bank at the time.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4584/2552.
The contract between the plaintiff and the defendant is a contract to transfer the patent. It is required that the transferor is the plaintiff's four vendors must transfer technology to the transferee is the defendant. It is a reciprocal agreement under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 369, the plaintiff has the obligation to transfer technology to the defendant. And the defendant is obliged to pay the four plaintiffs. So the four plaintiffs have been named as shareholders in the defendant company. And the defendant to pay off the plaintiff's share of the four unpaid debts to the defendant. Subsequently, the defendant sent the share certificates to the plaintiff. It shows that the defendant accepted the repayment of shares. When the four plaintiffs admitted that no technology transfer to the defendant. The four plaintiffs have not requested payment of the debt under Section 208, so it may not be considered defendant breach of contract. The plaintiff has no right to terminate the contract.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4584/2552.
The contract between the plaintiff and the defendant is a contract to transfer the patent. It is required that the transferor is the plaintiff's four vendors must transfer technology to the transferee is the defendant. It is a reciprocal agreement under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 369, the plaintiff has the obligation to transfer technology to the defendant. And the defendant is obliged to pay the four plaintiffs. So the four plaintiffs have been named as shareholders in the defendant company. And the defendant to pay off the plaintiff's share of the four unpaid debts to the defendant. Subsequently, the defendant sent the share certificates to the plaintiff. It shows that the defendant accepted the repayment of shares. When the four plaintiffs admitted that no technology transfer to the defendant. The four plaintiffs have not requested to repay the debt. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 208 can not be considered defendant breach of contract. The plaintiff has no right to terminate the contract.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3705/2551.
Creditors have the right to make their repayment from the property of the debtor to the full. Civil and Commercial Code Section 214 when the debtors died. The plaintiff will have the right to call the defendant as the heirs of the e. Pay debts from property in the estate of the e. The plaintiff has the right to remove the property under the mortgage under Section 1754, paragraph two and Section 192/27, but it is only possible to enforce the mortgage. Can not enforce any property in the estate. Although the mortgage agreement is an agreement to the end of the mortgage agreement, the creditor has the right to seize other assets of the debtor to repay the debt if the mortgage is not enough. When the debt, which is the debt of the president, is over. Other property in the estate will no longer fall into civil liability.

Under the loan agreement, the borrower must arrange for mortgage insurance by the lender to be the beneficiary. In case the borrower does not have insurance, the lender will arrange the insurance instead of the borrower. The borrower agrees to pay the fees and reimbursement to the lender prior to repayment under the loan agreement. Must pay the premium that the lender has paid instead. The plaintiff sued the defendant after the filing. The debt is not yet due for debt in the future, and will be considered to have failed to repay their debts. Therefore, there is no dispute about the rights or obligations of the plaintiff and the defendant in the law to the defendant as the heirs of the debt of the debt.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2147/2551.
Damages for damages, such as those normally incurred by non-payment of the debt, the debtor is liable for damages, which are ordinary or direct result of non-repayment. But the costs of soliciting debt and litigation. Including the cost of filing a petition and enforcing the lawsuit is not a direct result of breach of contract. And not damage, but special circumstances that the debtor may expect or should expect. There is no law enforcing the wrong party to default on the charges. The plaintiff is not entitled to claim damages.

The Code of Civil Procedure Code Section 161 provides for the The tradition of the couple in the case falls to the couple who lost the case. However, it is the discretion of the court, taking into account the merits and good faith in the fight or prosecution of all parties. The plaintiff is an appellate and is a party to the case appealed to the court. The custom in the appeal class is folded, so it's a discretionary preference.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2574/2551.
Court of First Instance sentenced all four defendants to pay the interest together with the plaintiff. If not paid to mortgage the land of the defendant at auction 1. If the money is not enough to seize other assets of the defendant, the defendant to the third and fourth defendants must be jointly liable to pay all the debt to the plaintiff. When the plaintiff forced to pay off the mortgage of the defendant was not enough money to pay debts. The plaintiff can enforce debt from the property of the defendants 3 and 4 under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 214.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6239/2551.
The defendant rented the ground floor of the building from the plaintiff has a term of 3 years. The defendant will be entitled to terminate the contract to the plaintiff at any time. The defendant will terminate the contract before the expiration of the lease period, so it must comply. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 387 to 389

Defendant does not pay rent to the plaintiff within the time specified in the contract. The defendant was defaulted without warning. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, paragraph two, the plaintiff shall have the power to enforce the defendant to pay rent under the lease to the plaintiff under Section 213 paragraph one without the right to terminate the contract.

The plaintiff sued the defendant to pay the rent due before the lease due to not use the right to terminate the contract. The plaintiff's defendant did not terminate the contract. The plaintiff is entitled to compensation for the unpaid rent. The defendant transferred the property from the lease before the lease.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 5298/2551.
The plaintiff is a limited liability company, not a statutory financial institution. The contract has not yet announced the Ministry of Finance and announced the Bank of Thailand. Set the criteria and conditions for conducting personal loans business for non-financial business operators. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 654, and the Interest Rate Prohibition Act of 1975, Section 3 prohibits the interest rate of more than 15% per annum, even if the plaintiff will calculate the contractual benefits as the first service. And the fee for the use of credit is different from the interest charged by the name is different. But such benefits are the compensation that the defendant must use for the plaintiff from the loan, so the plaintiff's money is the first service fee and the use of such funds is the interest of the loan agreement. The plaintiff benefits as all interest under the contract. First charge Fee and interest charged monthly The calculation of the money and all the interest calculated in advance for two years, the defendant must pay the same amount of money and interest to the plaintiff every month, the amount of interest that the defendant must not pay down the proportion of the reduced money. down It is a flat rate when calculated as an effective rate, which exceeds 15% per annum, in violation of the provisions of the Act. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 654, and the Interest Rate Prohibition Act of 1975, Section 3 of the Agreement on the benefits of borrowing in the interest of all interest is void. The plaintiff has no right to claim interest at the rate of the defendant. And must deduct the first service fee paid by the plaintiff to the defendant is liable to the plaintiff under the contract. The problem is the law of public order. The Supreme Court has the power to lift the judgment.
3)

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2625/2551.  
Civil and Commercial Code, Section 225 states that "if the debtor is required to make a claim for the price of the object has deteriorated between the defaults. Or objects that can not be delivered because of any of the problems that occurred during the default. That the creditor will call the interest that will be used as a compensation from the time that the base of the estimate of the price ... "The plaintiff sued the defendant to pay debt is to deliver the mouth. 1 set of earphones in good working condition Otherwise, the price of the plaintiff. If the object of the debt is to deliver the mouthpiece, the ear canal is also able to act, the plaintiff must ask the defendant to pay the debt to the true needs of the debt by delivering the mouthpiece. Earphone Will the defendant use the price of equipment, mouthpiece, earphones can not be replaced. And the delivery of mouthpiece equipment, not the money. The plaintiff may not be charged interest from the date the defendant defaulted on delivery of equipment, mouthpiece, earphone, plaintiff. When the delivery of the mouthpiece device is impossible, it is impossible to do so because of one of the circumstances that the defendant is responsible for. The plaintiff will have the right to claim the defendant's compensation is the price of equipment, mouthpiece, ear, with interest in the amount of money, equipment, mouthpiece, earpiece, since the time the base of the estimated price. Section 218, paragraph one, and Section 225. Therefore, the time to estimate the price of equipment, mouthpiece, headset is not the time the defendant failed to send a message. Equipment set headset mike night, according to the prosecution. But that means the time of repayment is to deliver the mouthpiece kit, earphone, the plaintiff's return becomes impossible to do. When the fact does not appear that the repayment is impossible at any time. Defendant is liable for interest on the price of such property since the date of the plaintiff sued the defendant to pay this debt. Civil and Commercial Code Section 213

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1265/2551 
Defendant entered into a contract to sell the heat detector brand Tron to the plaintiff. Defendant will deliver other brands to the plaintiff. Even if the product has the same features. When the defendant delivered another brand of heat detectors. It is a debt that does not meet the true purpose of the debt. The plaintiff, the creditor, is entitled to claim compensation for the damage caused by that, but the employee of the plaintiff, the inspection of the goods. Do not check the product carefully before the brand is a contract or not. It is considered negligent action of the representative of the plaintiff. The plaintiff is responsible for the negligence of the Welsh under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 223, paragraph two, Section 220.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1104/2551.
The defendant must pay compensation to the plaintiff to compensate the plaintiff to compensate the plaintiff's damages. The money that the defendant must pay to the plaintiff immediately after the default date is the date of the violation. The interest of such damages is not an arrears of 5 years under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 193/33 (1), and the absence of specific law provisions. So it is 10 years old under Section 193/30.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3792/2551.
Compromise agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant. The schedule of each payment is determined by the calendar day. If both defendants defaulted on the repayment of any one installment, both defendants defaulted on repayment of the debt. Allow the plaintiff to execute the case immediately. Indicates the intent of the parties wishing to assume the time of repayment is defined as significant. And the Court of First Instance was sentenced under a compromise agreement. Therefore, the plaintiff and the defendant both. The law of civil procedure, Section 145, first paragraph, even if the plaintiff will receive the payment of the first installment to the fourth installment, which is not paid according to schedule. The plaintiff did not think the default interest of the two defendants, it is that the plaintiff did not intend to enforce the case at that time. Do not make the two defendants from the obligation to repay the next installment to meet. When the two defendants continue to repay the fifth installment is not meet again. It is a default.

Both defendants defaulted on the settlement of the settlement agreement. The plaintiff has the right to ask the court to seize the land of the second defendant to pay the debt under the agreement under the compromise agreement. Code of Civil Procedure, Section 271. Even if the plaintiff knew that the land, the second defendant has offered to sell the Suphan Buri Teacher Savings Cooperative Limited and the Board of Supervisors Suphanburi Teacher Savings Cooperative Ltd. has resolved to buy from the defendant No. 2. It does not use the right to enforce the case in bad faith.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2680/2551.
According to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 224, first paragraph, the plaintiff has the right to charge interest from the defendant as soon as the defendant is a default debtor. But the defendant did not send the accused to the plaintiff as scheduled, only to cause a debt to the plaintiff under the contract. The defendant will be the debtor to pay the fine in the penalty when the plaintiff has warned the defendant to pay the debt. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, first paragraph

Judgment of the Supreme Court 997/2551.
According to the advertising contract, the date of repayment. The payment is made after 30 days, and the day is 4 and 9 December 1997. The due date is on 3 and 8 January 1998, therefore, it is considered that the calendar date is fixed. But when the plaintiff's employees to send invoices and billing statements to the defendant. Defendant stated in the bill that. Please receive money on March 13, 1998, the plaintiff did not protest. The plaintiff and the defendant did not hold the contract payment due date. As a matter of fact, the defendant will default when the plaintiff has warned to pay the debt, then the defendant does not pay. The Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, paragraph one, will charge interest under Section 224.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4636/2551.
The plaintiff signed a contract to buy land in the agreement on the transfer. The seller will transfer the right to the buyer later when the buyer wants to transfer. If the time to repay debt is not set. The plaintiff, the creditor, will be called to repay the debt immediately. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 203, first paragraph, the plaintiff's claim may be enforced from the date of the contract. When the plaintiff brought the case to enforce the contract more than 10 years from the date of the contract. The plaintiff's lawsuit will expire in accordance with Section 193/30.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2561/2550.
The plaintiff signed a contract to purchase asphalt cement from the defendant has an agreement that if the defendant does not deliver the goods as required by the contract. The plaintiff has the right to terminate the contract for the collateral and during the termination of the contract, the defendant agrees to the plaintiff's daily rate of 0.2 percent of the price of goods not delivered from the delivery date to the date of termination. promise When the defendant did not deliver the goods to the plaintiff as stipulated in the contract. The plaintiff did not immediately terminate the contract. But the plaintiff notified the defendant to submit a 1 and the defendant claims the defendant has a letter of acceptance to agree to pay the contract. This circumstance holds that the plaintiff's special damages in this respect, the defendant was expected to follow. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, the defendant is obliged to pay a penalty on a daily basis.

The plaintiff is the government agency will be damaged by the work of the government is not according to the plan, or not benefit from the project, which is the special circumstances. It must be something that the couple expected or should have expected such circumstances before then followed. The Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, paragraph two, and the parties shall accept the facts or bring witnesses to appear. But the plaintiff did not prove to the court that the plaintiff was particularly damaged. There is no claim in this section.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3664/2550.
The plaintiff is a debtor under the judgment of the court to pay the debt of the court to the ultimate judgment, which the plaintiff to the defendant disputes the car to the defendant, the defendant, the creditor under the judgment. If it does not return, use the price instead. Debt to be paid under the judgment is enforceable, the plaintiff must execute the debt in the order preceding. However, the enforcement of the judgment is the right of creditors under the judgment that may accept any repayment of the judgment. It is not the order in the judgment. When the defendant accepted the plaintiff's money to be paid to the Department of Execution complete in accordance with the judgment. The defendant agreed to transfer ownership of the dispute to the plaintiff. The defendant has been paid. Defendant is obliged to register the plaintiff is the owner of the vehicle and return the vehicle disputes to the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2/2550
Damages caused by the creditors have to reduce the power. The nature of the damage that creditors receive is not the damage that normal people will generally be aware of, so no damage will normally occur. It is a special accident. Even debtors are professionals in the construction industry. But how much of the total electricity generation will be generated by the creditors? What is the demand for electricity? Accounts receivable can not be known. At any time, the creditor should have a plan to act in accordance with the facts of the power at that time already considering the details of the damages claimed by the creditors, then see that. Such damages are not expected by the debtor or should be expected. The debtor is not liable for this damages.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1530/2551.
Insurance or not insured in the plaintiff's goods is the right of the plaintiff does not involve any. With the damage of the goods, it can not be considered that the plaintiff contributed to the damage to the goods.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6228/2550.
The defendant entered into a loan agreement with the plaintiff under the agreement that "Clause 1 the borrower agreed to borrow and the lender agrees to loan totaling 160,000 baht (one hundred sixty thousand baht). Clause 2. The borrower agrees to deliver the loan under Clause 1 without interest to the lender within the time that the borrower has sold the land which is the legacy property of the borrower. The land title deed no. 5027 was landed at 329 pages at 943 Bangkae Sub-district, Bang Khae Sub-district, Phasi Charoen District. Bangkok The land is divided by approximately 4 rai already. "It shows that the debt under the loan agreement has already occurred under the contract No. 1 agreement part 2 is an agreement on the repayment period, which is an early start. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 191, paragraph one, but the schedule of repayment as specified in the contract No. 2 is not clear that when the land is completed, the defendant will be able to sell the land or not. When will the land be sold? It is a future event that is not necessarily happening. The deadline for such repayment is uncertain. Equal to indefinite debt. The creditor will be called to repay the debt immediately. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 203, paragraph one.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 8260/2550 defendant owes the plaintiff debt owed to the defendant must pay the plaintiff without any conditions. Because the repayment will be successful. The debtor must apply for payment of debt to the creditors directly. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 208, paragraph one, when the defendant offered to pay the plaintiff by the plaintiff to transfer the mortgage instead of payment of money. It is not a debt repayment. The plaintiff has reason to refuse to accept the plaintiff is not a default under Section 207.

Section 733 of the Civil and Commercial Code Provisions assume the intent of the parties in particular. And it is not morally popular among the common people or the traditions of society. It is not a provision of law relating to public order or morals. The plaintiff may agree with the defendant is something other than the provisions of Section 733.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6109/2550. Compromise Agreement 4 stipulates that if the defendant defaulted one of the periods or any month. All defaults allow the plaintiff to force. When the defendant did not pay the plaintiff's attorney's fees to the plaintiff under the compromise agreement, Clause 2 within the date of June 15, 1995, it can be held that the defendant defaulted on the debt payment to the plaintiff to comply with the verdict. The plaintiff has the right to enforce the case to the defendant in accordance with Article 4 of the plaintiff. Therefore, the claim to enforce the plaintiff's debt under the verdict of such consent, which has a ten-year term, began on June 16, 1995. Not starting on July 16, 2538, which is the day after the defendant defaulted, defaults and interest payments to the plaintiff for the first installment of the contract. Nom compromise to 1 lead plaintiff, the judgment debt by allowing such a lawsuit on July 14, 2548 expiration of 10 years and then expire.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 5297/2550.
The plaintiff and the defendant entered into a compromise agreement and the Court of First Instance. The two defendants pay 500,000 baht to the plaintiff agreed to pay monthly installment of money to the court at least 4,000 baht per month consecutive months. The first payment will be made on February 22nd, 2002. The payment will be made on the 22nd of the month. The payment will be completed within 8 years from the date of the compromise agreement. Allow the plaintiff to execute the case immediately. Judgment of the defendant has set the date and the amount of debt to be exact, so when the two defendants do not put money in court, it can be held that the defendant has defaulted 2 failed to comply with the judgment. Although the plaintiff will seek the money that the defendant brought to court after the default, then the defendant did not leave the plaintiff as the default of the plaintiff asked the court to enforce the case immediately.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 5206/2550. Both defendants are not guilty of sending the accused to the plaintiff in the appointment. The plaintiff has the right to demand that the two defendants pay the amount specified in the insurance contract, which is a fine from that date. The two defendants will default the penalty payment from the date of it. The insurance does not set the time to repay the debt to the same. The plaintiff would like to announce the time to repay the debt if the two defendants did not pay the name was defaulted when.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3791/2550.
A loan loan for sugar cane said. Lend money to buy sugarcane varieties and sugarcane plant maintenance. When the sugarcane grows, the borrower agrees to cut off the sale to the lender for the sugar cane repayment. It is not specified that the borrower must plant sugarcane for sale to the lender when. The debt is not scheduled. The check payable to the plaintiff to the defendant in the loan is not scheduled to repay the loan. The plaintiff demanded the defendant pay the debt within 7 days from the date of receipt of the letter. The defendant did not pay the debt within the deadline. It is a default since the expiration date.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 932/2550.
The mortgage is a promise to take the property as a guarantee of debt with the president and mortgage debt equipment. They may be separated from each other. Creditors prefer to take the right to claim the ordinary debt is to force repayment of the general property of the debtor under Civil and Commercial Code, Section 213 or mortgage is to use the option to pay the mortgage of property under Section 728 neither the provisions of the law that in the case of mortgage debt. The creditor will prosecute debtors as ordinary debt under Section 214 is not only the law. In the case that the plaintiff is entitled to mortgage the plaintiff's right to fall under the provisions of Section 733 only, and Section 733 does not force the plaintiff to have the right to file a mortgage. The plaintiff has the power to sue the defendant to repay the loan. When the defendant does not pay the debt to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has the right to enforce the other defendant's property, including the mortgage. The plaintiff is not entitled to enforce the case, but only land pledged as mortgage insurance.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 405/2550.
Debt under promissory note The date the defendant, the issuer of the promissory note, promised to use the money to the plaintiff. It is indefinite that the calendar day. Is on a date specified in the promissory note. When the defendant and the first defendant did not pay the promissory note, the defendant was immediately the default. Without notice. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, paragraph two, although Section 985 shall provide Section 941 on the Bill of Exchange shall also apply to promissory notes. It must be used as far as the condition of the promissory note. The provisions in the promissory note. Promissory notes must be issued to the issuer. Or promissory notes, which will be used at a certain time after the see only in Section 986, paragraph two, when the promissory note is a ticket with a clear date of use. Is not in force. Section 986, paragraph two, the plaintiff is not required to bring promissory notes filed under Section 941 again.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1768/2549.
Although the Ministry of Finance has ordered the suspension of the business of the defendant and the first defendant to prevent the defendant to pay the promissory note on the date of the promissory note, but the defendant can still be rehabilitated and may operate. If the situation and the operation of the defendant is successful and the Ministry of Finance has informed the holder of the promissory note. The first defendant with a plaintiff to aval to contact the defendant for payment 2 through the defendant in the normal when the promissory note to the defendant so that the defendant is unable to pay the debt under the plaintiff disputes to the plaintiff. It is not the case that the debt is not possible because the defendant became a person can not pay debts. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 219, paragraph two.

The defendant can not pay the debt to the plaintiff as the promissory note is already. The defendant was suspended by the Ministry of Finance. The defendant is a defendant who is not responsible for the debt. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 205 So long as the defendant has not yet paid the debt because of the reason that the defendant is still not called the default.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6027/2549.
Prior to the defendant, the defendant was accused the defendant's second husband, the defendant, the second defendant to find the clerk of the plaintiff's bank branch to pay the debt 5 million to repay the mortgage of the defendant, but the second. Payment Only talk to the bank. The circumstances of the defendant 2 shows that they are not in a position to be able to repay it. And not to pay the debt to the plaintiff. Can not claim that the plaintiff did not pay the debt. Civil and Commercial Code Section 207

Judgment of the Supreme Court 7875/2549. The plaintiff has the purpose of operating machinery business. Furniture, electrical equipment and parts and accessories of such goods. The plaintiff's distribution of furniture to the defendant, it is a business or the business of the plaintiff, the defendant is a hotel business. The defendant bought a furniture from the plaintiff to be used in the hotel business of the defendant, which is the business of the defendant, so the exception to. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 193/34 (1), so that the plaintiff sued the price of furniture that is overdue from the defendant to the age of 5 years under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 193/33 (5)

The transaction between the plaintiff and the defendant did not set a time to repay the debt to the plaintiff, the creditor will be called to repay the debt immediately and the defendant, the debtors will repay their own by default. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 203 So when the plaintiff delivered the goods to the first defendant, the right to claim money from the defendant, the first must start from the date the defendant has been handed over from each plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 7943/2549.
The debtor is bound by the contract to buy and sell the apartment with the creditor, the responsibility is to prevent water leakage from the upper floor. Both creditors have not entered into a new waterproofing contract with a third party. The case is not a new debt change by changing the debtor to make the original debt suspension.

When the building that the creditor receives from the debtor has a water leakage of the deck on the 8th floor and the contract to buy and sell the apartment 12, the debtor is obliged to waterproof the 8th floor all with good waterproofing material to prevent water from the field. Tennis, pool, rain or other waterproofing. Come down to the ground floor of the building on the creditors' side. When the incident occurs, the debtor is responsible for repairing the problem. If not, the creditor will have the right to outsource the operation by calling the expense of the debtor, which can be considered as a loss caused by non-repayment of debt. The Civil and Commercial Code, Section 213 and Section 215. Even if the creditor has not yet repaired, it is called the expense of the debtor by filing a request for payment to the official receiver.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 7732/2548.
After the plaintiff paid the 11th installment to the plaintiff, the plaintiff did not pay the remaining amount to the defendant because the defendant in the construction of the dispute was not completed until now because of financial problems. The case is clearly seen that by the circumstances of the case or by the condition or intent of the defendant that the defendant does not intend to comply with the contract. There is no reason for the plaintiff to tell the time to the defendant to build another disputed building. Because the defendant did not build a dispute over the construction of a non-payment of the debt and if the plaintiff still has to pay the remaining amount to the defendant, the damage to the plaintiff will increase further, so the plaintiff. I like to terminate the contract without the need to notify the time limit for the defendant to complete the construction of the dispute. Termination of the plaintiff's favor and it is considered that the defendant is in breach of contract to sell to the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 417/2549.
The petitioner did not notify the Enforcement Officer at the time when the price of land to develop for profit, however, which would make the delay in the transfer of land will cause the petitioner to lose business interests until the land is no longer useful. To the caller Can not assume the Enforcement Officer is implicitly. The auction of the court order. The Civil Procedure Code allows interested parties to object to the auction. The buyer may not be transferred immediately. There may be an objection to the auction. The case is not required by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 388 will be deemed to be successful, but with repayment within the time of the auction. The lawsuit in the floor. A. oppose the auction The court also ordered the petition. There is no order to revoke the auction, so that the transfer of ownership of the land to the petitioner becomes impossible. The case is not required by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 219 as well, the petitioner has no right to terminate the contract and request a refund.

The Civil and Commercial Code, Section 514, provides for the fighters in the price of the auction, freeing up their commitment to price, but when someone else fights higher prices. Or the withdrawal of the property from the auction, the fighter is out of bondage, but while withdrawing it is the same. The highest bidder and the buyer of the property at the auction. The petitioner can not raise the law, claiming to be free of ties.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 8055/2548.
The hire-purchase agreement accepted by the plaintiff does not meet the deadline to show that the hire-purchase does not consider the lease payment period is significant. When the defendant transferred the lease contract from the lender without a dispute. Therefore, it must be bound by the wishes of the parties that do not consider the period of payment of the lease as a significant. To terminate the contract, the defendant must notify the plaintiff to pay the lease within a reasonable time. The fact is that the plaintiff has paid the hire purchase only 3 installments, the plaintiff asked to pay the hire purchase, but the defendant did not accept the claim that the arrears of up to 9, so it is not accepting the debt without legal grounds to be claimed. The defendant is the contract. The plaintiff does not pay the lease within the deadline to terminate the contract can not hold that the plaintiff default.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 8141/2548. The plaintiff delivered the goods and the defect. The defendant liked to hold the price of goods and the payment as follows: The debt has not been committed because of one of the circumstances that the defendant, the debtor is not responsible. The defendant defaulted from the settlement date as agreed under Section 205 of the Civil and Commercial Code, the plaintiff is not entitled to charge interest. But when the court ordered the defendant to use this money. It owed money that the defendant must pay by the judgment and must pay interest from the date the plaintiff is entitled to from the date the court of first instance on.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6375/2547.
The plaintiff agreed to buy wind and gas from the defendant by the plaintiff made a deposit (insurance) borrowing pipes, air and gas to the defendant. Later, the plaintiff notified the defendant to pick up the pipe and return the deposit. Otherwise the pipe will be sold out. The intention of the plaintiff, even the defendant. But when the defendant did not agree. The plaintiff has no right to sell the pipe as notified. Because the contract and the pipe loan agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant does not require the plaintiff to sell the pipe of the defendant to take money deducted from the deposit loan pipe. Although the defendant is obliged to return the pledge money to the plaintiff. But the plaintiff has to return the pipe to the defendant as well. When the plaintiff brought the plaintiff's pipe to sell without the right to do. The plaintiff has no right to call the defendant to return the pledge to the plaintiff under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 369

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1074/2546.
The plaintiff delivered the plaintiff's paddy to the defendant, the color is rice and then return the rice to the plaintiff. The plaintiff's compensation to the defendant is broken rice and bran. It is a reciprocal agreement. When the mill burns, there is no rice. The rice that the defendant must deliver to the plaintiff is the only thing. When the defendant can not deliver the rice to the plaintiff due to the fire of the defendant's mill. It does not appear that the actions of any person can not hold that the cause of the fire is due to the circumstances that the defendant is responsible. The settlement of the defendant by the delivery of rice to the plaintiff would become impossible because of circumstances in which the debtor is not responsible under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 219, paragraph one.

The delivery of paddy to the defendant will be sent in installments. The defendant paddy paint to complete the period. But it does not appear that when the defendant finished rice, the rice must be delivered to the plaintiff when. The plaintiff did not demand that the defendant delivered the finished color to the plaintiff and returned to the plaintiff. In the delivery of rice, the plaintiff must wait for the plaintiff's order to send the amount. When the plaintiff did not call the defendant delivered the rice to the plaintiff. It is not held that the defendant defaulted on delivery of rice to the plaintiff, which will be liable under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 217.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3506/2546.
The economic crisis in Thailand may have an effect on some debtors, so they can not repay their debt to financial institutions as usual, but it is a circumstance that makes repayment impossible, according to the Civil and Commercial Code. Section 219, paragraph one, is unenforceable. To consider the case. Especially the defendant. 1 has mortgaged the land as a loan guarantee with the plaintiff. The plaintiff has the right to request the court to enforce the debt under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 213,728 of the defendant's debt to be in a position to practice the defendant is obliged to pay the debt to the plaintiff will continue to cite the crisis. The economy of the country is relieved to be released from enforcement.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3602/2546 Claims of the plaintiff in the debt arising from the use of goods and services of the trader or service provider. No clear repayment schedule. Can be considered as indefinite repayment period, the creditor will have the right to demand repayment of the debt under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 203.

The lease agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant. No time limit for the defendant to pay debts arising from the use of telephone services. Even if the terms of the contract specify the user to pay the service fee to the service provider within the period specified in the invoice. It is only a condition of notice to pay debts in accordance with the meaning of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 387, so the claim of the plaintiff to call for the defendant to pay for the service charges occurred since the defendant used the telephone service of the plaintiff. Each time During the period of time the defendant used the telephone service until the date of filing for more than two years, the plaintiff's case was terminated.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2438 - 2439/2545.
Defendant 1, construction and delivery of the first to fourth installment to the Plaintiff's plaintiff to accept delivery of work and payment of installment 1 to 3 full, and the fourth installment partially paid. The plaintiff was not defaulted, but the defendant did not terminate the contract after the construction date, the plaintiff paid the outstanding payment in the fourth installment to the defendant, then the defendant to build and deliver the installment. The 5th and 6th plaintiffs accept the fifth and sixth installments and pay the full payment. Show that the plaintiff and the defendant. 1 continue to treat each other under the contract. The deadline for handing over the work and pay periodically is not significant. And do not need to extend the construction period, but the defendant, the first construction work, the seventh, the final period is not completed and abandoned. The plaintiff's damage to the defendant is a contract. The plaintiff has the right to terminate the contract.

Even the plaintiff will have the right to adjust the defendant in the case of delayed delivery of the contract, but after the completion of construction time, the parties do not consider the delivery schedule is as follows: the date of delivery of the work is delayed. No longer The plaintiff has no right to adjust the defendant on a daily basis, it is entitled to claim that the wage increase in the work to complete the contract. To replace the damage that normally occurs, but not to pay it. According to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222 and if the plaintiff, the injured person has committed one of the offenses causing damage. The court shall in its absolute discretion reduce the amount of damages in accordance with Section 223

Defendant 1 abandoned the 7th job since 16 May 1995, which the plaintiff should immediately terminate the contract immediately to prevent further damage. But the plaintiff abandoned the right to terminate the contract on September 11, 2538, which is almost 4 months apart, then the plaintiff recently signed a contract to build a limited partnership to build the rest of the work. After the plaintiff to terminate the contract to the defendant for a period of up to 1 year and 5 months, the cost of construction work up and the damage to the construction. The court will use reasonable discretion to reduce the amount of damages.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1336/2545.
The defendant built a commercial property to be sold to the plaintiff ready to be transferred from the beginning of October 2539, the plaintiff will be responsible for the transfer and payment of the remaining 2,000,000 baht to the defendant, but the plaintiff did not pay even during that time, Settlements are material. Since the defendant is selling the land and the land to others. For the benefit of the plaintiff. But it is not certain to be successful. The plaintiff will have enough time to prepare the payment to the defendant, the defendant has written to the plaintiff to pay the defendant overdue within 15 days from the date of receipt of the letter. The time after the defendant built a commercial building almost 1 year, so it is timely. When the letter stated intention to terminate the contract. And the plaintiff does not pay within the time of the contract to buy and sell will be dissolved 15 days after the date the plaintiff received the letter. Each party must return to the same place as the defendant has a duty to refund 1,200,000 Baht with interest to the plaintiff. Under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 391, paragraph one and paragraph two.

Plaintiff paid a down payment of 300,000 baht, which is part of the amount of 1,200,000 baht to the defendant on the contract date. It is not intended as a guarantee of compliance with the contract. Must be part of the price paid by the plaintiff. Not a deposit to the defendant. When the defendant has a letter to the plaintiff to pay the rest within 15 days from the date the plaintiff received the letter, then the plaintiff ignored. The plaintiff is a default under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, paragraph two, the defendant has the right to claim compensation from the plaintiff for damage, but the plaintiff's default under Section 215, the defendant said. The defendant does not have to refund 1,200,000 baht to the plaintiff until the full amount. Because the defendant was damaged. Because the plaintiff defaulted and have to pay interest on loans from the bank to build a building enough to translate the defendant's claim is 1,200,000 baht, it is a claim for damages, but the plaintiff failed to repay the debt.

The plaintiff did not pay 2 million baht to the defendant, causing the defendant to pay interest to the bank for the amount of 17.5 percent per annum, but such damages are for special damage caused by circumstances under the Civil Code. Commercial and Section 222, paragraph two, when the defendant did not notify the plaintiff, the plaintiff did not expect or should be expected to see the loss. So before then. The defendant will not be liable to the plaintiff. However, the plaintiff did not pay the debt to the defendant will cause damage to the defendant. Even the defendant can not claim damages. The court has the power to calculate the case according to the circumstances of the case compared with the interest rate in case the debtor defaulted under Section 224 paragraph one, and the good faith in the litigation.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1336/2545.
The defendant built a commercial property to be sold to the plaintiff ready to be transferred from the beginning of October 2539, the plaintiff will be responsible for the transfer and payment of the remaining 2,000,000 baht to the defendant, but the plaintiff did not pay even during that time, Settlements are material. Since the defendant is selling the land and the land to others. For the benefit of the plaintiff. But it is not certain to be successful. The plaintiff will have enough time to prepare the payment to the defendant, the defendant has written to the plaintiff to pay the defendant overdue within 15 days from the date of receipt of the letter. The time after the defendant built a commercial building almost 1 year, so it is timely. When the letter stated intention to terminate the contract. And the plaintiff does not pay within the time of the contract to buy and sell will be dissolved 15 days after the date the plaintiff received the letter. Each party must return to the same place as the defendant has a duty to refund 1,200,000 Baht with interest to the plaintiff. Under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 391, paragraph one and paragraph two.

Plaintiff paid a down payment of 300,000 baht, which is part of the amount of 1,200,000 baht to the defendant on the contract date. It is not intended as a guarantee of compliance with the contract. Must be part of the price paid by the plaintiff. Not a deposit to the defendant. When the defendant has a letter to the plaintiff to pay the rest within 15 days from the date the plaintiff received the letter, then the plaintiff ignored. The plaintiff is a default under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 204, paragraph two, the defendant has the right to claim compensation from the plaintiff for damage, but the plaintiff's default under Section 215, the defendant said. The defendant does not have to refund 1,200,000 baht to the plaintiff until the full amount. Because the defendant was damaged. Because the plaintiff defaulted and have to pay interest on loans from the bank to build a building enough to translate the defendant's claim is 1,200,000 baht, it is a claim for damages, but the plaintiff failed to repay the debt.

The plaintiff did not pay 2 million baht to the defendant, causing the defendant to pay interest to the bank for the amount of 17.5 percent per annum, but such damages are for special damage caused by circumstances under the Civil Code. Commercial and Section 222, paragraph two, when the defendant did not notify the plaintiff, the plaintiff did not expect or should be expected to see the loss. So before then. The defendant will not be liable to the plaintiff. However, the plaintiff did not pay the debt to the defendant will cause damage to the defendant. Even the defendant can not claim damages. The court has the power to calculate the case according to the circumstances of the case compared with the interest rate in case the debtor defaulted under Section 224 paragraph one, and the good faith in the litigation.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 699/2545.
The defendant did not transfer the right to lease land and commercial buildings to the plaintiff under the contract of sale. The plaintiff is entitled to compensation or damages for damages caused by failure to pay debts under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 215, Section 222, must be the normal damage occurs or occur only in special circumstances. Do not need to be really damaged, so when the two defendants offered to sell commercial buildings, the price of each room is 2,000,000 baht, the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal determine the damages to the plaintiff 850,000 per room is appropriate.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 302/2545.
Guarantee agreement Guarantee of liabilities in the amount specified in the guarantee agreement and debt equipment with interest, loss of debt, even if the contract of guarantee or debt equipment does not set interest rates, it must hold the interest rate specified. In contract or debt of the president

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4469/2543.
To register the transfer of lease contract. The defendant is required to file an application for registration of rights and juristic acts to transfer the lease right before the date of registration. The official must issue a notice no less than 30 days before the date of registration. If no one obeys, the official will register. A letter of consent must be provided to transfer the leasehold rights from the lessor to the official. At the same time, the plaintiff is obliged to pay the remaining amount on the transfer date. It appears on the transfer date. The defendant did not file the application for registration and no consent of the lessor to show. The plaintiff was not prepared to pay the defendant. Case of the plaintiff and the defendant can be adjusted under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 210, 211, both parties have no contract parties. And the promise to each other. We do not intend to follow the contract. Therefore, the parties must return to their original position. Civil and Commercial Section 391, the defendant must return the money received to the plaintiff with interest from the time of receipt. And when the defendant did not break the contract, the plaintiff has no right to call. Take penalties under the lawsuit.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4469/2543.
To register the transfer of lease contract. The defendant is required to file an application for registration of rights and juristic acts to transfer the lease right before the date of registration. The official must issue a notice no less than 30 days before the date of registration. If no one obeys, the official will register. A letter of consent must be provided to transfer the leasehold rights from the lessor to the official. At the same time, the plaintiff is obliged to pay the remaining amount on the transfer date. It appears on the transfer date. The defendant did not file the application for registration and no consent of the lessor to show. The plaintiff was not prepared to pay the defendant. Case of the plaintiff and the defendant can be adjusted under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 210, 211, both parties have no contract parties. And the promise to each other. We do not intend to follow the contract. Therefore, the parties must return to their original position. Civil and Commercial Section 391, the defendant must return the money received to the plaintiff with interest from the time of receipt. And when the defendant did not break the contract, the plaintiff has no right to call. Take penalties under the lawsuit.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3757/2543.
Defendant is the descendant and heir of the estate. Made a letter of the loan of the inheritance loan from the plaintiff. The defendant agreed that if the defendant inherited the amount. The defendant will pay the entire amount of money and interest to the plaintiff. If the inheritance of the defendant was not enough to repay the debt. Defendant will raise all inherited property to the plaintiff, the defendant did not repay the debt. The defendant did not transfer the inheritance to the plaintiff. The default is not debt repayment debt only. The plaintiff sued the defendant to pay the debt or called. Damages or losses caused by the failure to repay. According to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 213,215,222 or Section 224, as the case may be, the action of the defendant is not a violation of the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 8103/2542.
Calling the defendant to return property. If not returned to pay the plaintiff. The replacement cost is considered as damages. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, paragraph one, so it is called for damages such as the usual occurrence, but the failure to pay it. And the plaintiff can call the interest in the price between the default of seven percent per annum under Section 224, paragraph one and 225.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 7943/2542. When the defendant is in breach of the contract of hire of a vessel that the plaintiff rented the cargo on the date agreed with the plaintiff under the lease agreement, the plaintiff was damaged. The plaintiff has the right to claim from the defendant. It is the duty of the plaintiff to prove proof. Unless the plaintiff proves the damage was not as requested. The court has the power to determine the damages, such as would normally occur from the defendant's breach of the contract. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, but the plaintiff's damages will be subject to the terms of the lease. If the plaintiff proves to be damaged. The plaintiff is entitled to compensation as claimed. It must not exceed the estimated freight.

Liability for damages is limited to damages incurred normally in breach of contract. The plaintiff's employer, who is not a party to the contract, has entered into a contract with the buyer. If the breach of contract is to be adjusted to 30 percent of the price of the same or not. It is a special circumstance. The defendant could not expect to see such an agreement. The plaintiff has no right to claim the defendant liable for damages arising from this special circumstance. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, paragraph two, the plaintiff has a contract to lease the ship, the plaintiff will cause the plaintiff the right to claim on the ship. In order to file a petition to the court to detain the boat to leave the port because the defendant violated the contract. Act of Detention, 1991, Section 4, which is considered as a guarantee to force the defendant to pay damages caused by the defendant broken ship.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6678/2541.
Mortgage debt by the condition is only debt equipment, which will have to pay to each other, the debt of the president before the mortgage to take possession of the mortgage will be so. Even the plaintiff is the first mortgage agreement with the defendant. But when the non-repayment of the debt according to the verdict, which is the debt of the President of this case just occurred after the date of signing the mortgage agreement. The plaintiff will be charged interest on the date of the mortgage agreement can not find. According to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 193/33 (1) is an overdue interest, but the case of the plaintiff is owed according to the judgment of the plaintiff. It is not the case that the interest will be overdue for more than five years, the plaintiff has the right to receive interest from the date the Court of First Instance has a verdict until the plaintiff as the first mortgage creditor, a creditor priority. The right to be paid in full.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4932/2541.
Rent insurance under the lease agreement, the plaintiff, the lessor has the right to pay the rent or other arrears to pay rent insurance deduction when the defendant, the lessee moves the property and the retired. Rented And the plaintiff has the right to seize the entire amount of insurance in case the defendant did not notify the lease termination in writing for a period of 3 months, indicating that the insurance money for rent insurance money damage overdue rent. Other liabilities are unpaid, as well as insurance against damage, breach of contract. Such insurance is a penalty because the defendant promised the plaintiff to use a certain amount when they do not pay properly. When the defendant defaulted by the defendant did not terminate the lease in writing for a period of 3 months, this deposit insurance falls into force. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 379, 381, the plaintiff has the right to confiscate or collect the deposit insurance.

The compensation for termination of lease before the lease agreement stated that if the defendant terminated the lease before the expiration of the contract. The defendant will have to pay compensation for the termination of the contract is equal to 4 months rent increase again. The defendant has promised to use a certain amount. When they do not pay the debt properly. Compensation for the termination of the lease before the penalty is due to fall into force. Section 379,381, the plaintiff has the right to confiscate or cancel compensation before the lease termination as well.

The insurance and the compensation before the termination of the lease before it is a penalty for the defendant to pay the debt is not appropriate, even if the lease will specify the name of the two cases that the plaintiff has the right. Forfeit or call it different by reason of the confiscation or call it different. But the main reason is that the plaintiff has the right to confiscate or retrieve it must be due to the defendant to terminate the lease before maturity. In case the defendant terminated the lease without advance notice in writing for a period of 3 months cause the plaintiffs have the right to forfeit the rent. It is the plaintiff's right to forfeit the penalty because the plaintiff has the right to confiscate or cancel compensation before the termination of the lease. It is not the plaintiff's right to confiscate or claim compensation before the termination of the contract as specified in the lease. It is considered that the rental guarantee is a duplicate of the compensation for the termination of the lease before maturity. Because both penalties are a guarantee of damages in advance of the lease because the defendant did not pay the debt properly, so the penalty payable to the plaintiff has the right to confiscate or retrieve it when the interest of the plaintiff. Lawyer about the damage that the defendant canceled the lease before the deadline. It appears that the penalty is too high. Cause reduction of penalties according to the reasonable amount. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 383 will only adjust the rent compensation before the due date.

Business damages claimed by the plaintiff is damages to the lower floor decoration for the defendant to make temporary office. And compensation for the termination of the contract that the plaintiff must pay to the company as a result of the plaintiff to the defendant to rent floor 7, it is the plaintiff has to pay or lose before the plaintiff. Will enter into a lease with the defendant. When the plaintiff signed a lease with the defendant, the plaintiff will have the right to determine these damages in the contract as a deposit or penalty or higher rental rates, but the plaintiff will be liable to the defendant. In this case, it is not a claim for damages such as would normally occur in default. Or to damage, but special circumstances, as provided in Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222 because the compensation for damage to the plaintiff will have the right to defend the defendant in violation of the lease under Section 222 will be the damage that occurred after the defendant breached the lease. And the plaintiff was damaged by the defendant breached the lease. The plaintiff's loss of income from the interest of the deposit to the defendant must be placed to the plaintiff in the amount of 8,500,000 baht under the lease. Section 378 has a specific liability. This provision does not require the plaintiff to have interest in the deposit to the defendant must be placed with the plaintiff, it may not be the provisions of Section 222 to the defendant liability to the plaintiff.

Although the amount of 1,700,000 Baht will be the defendant paid to the plaintiff under the lease, which is part of the lease agreement. And in the lease will be identified as a deposit. However, it is not considered as a deposit in accordance with the definition provided in Civil and Commercial Section 377 because it is not the money that the defendant must pay the plaintiff to enter into a lease agreement is a part of the lease. In this case, the deposit provisions may not apply. Must comply with the terms of the lease specified when the lease agreement document 6, there is no provision for the plaintiff to confiscate this part of the defendant. I have stated that. The lessor will return the deposit to the lessee once the full rental charge is paid. After this contract ends, why? In addition, the principle of rent insurance to apply mutatis mutandis, so even if the lease termination because the defendant is a breach of contract. The plaintiff will have to refund this amount to the defendant. The plaintiff has the right to deduct the cost of telephone use deducted from the deposit. And the remaining money to the defendant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 7051/2540.
The plaintiff engaged in commercial furniture. Chinese doll pearl and porcelain vase The plaintiff contacted the purchase of a 50-wheeled tricycle from the company. The deposit was 2,500,000 baht, which is not in the business of the plaintiff. Even if the plaintiff claims that the plaintiff did not receive a loan from the bank, the plaintiff can not pay the seller of the tricycle, and the seller to take the pledge and the plaintiff lack of income from renting a tricycle. Damage as usual will occur, but the debt is not. And not the damage to the special circumstances that the defendant, the lender expected or should have expected such a situation beforehand. According to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, the two defendants are not liable to the plaintiff in damages as claimed by the plaintiff.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 2693/2540.
The plaintiff made a land purchase agreement with the defendant, the price of the land at the same price as the defendant stated in the notice. The deposit is made according to the number of conditions in the notice of the defendant, so it must be considered in the contract to purchase land. The plaintiff and the defendant agreed to pay the land price according to the announcement.

In the contract for the purchase of land, Clause 3 states that the plaintiff must enter into a contract to buy and sell the land with the defendant within 30 days from the date the defendant has a letter to the applicant to sign. If the booking does not come to the contract within the specified time. The defendant will be deemed to have breached the contract and no longer wishes to purchase such land. The defendant has the right to terminate the contract and the applicant agrees to the defendant forfeited the money as collateral. It is only an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to enter into a contract to buy and sell the land within 30 days from the date the defendant has written to the plaintiff to enter into a contract. It was agreed to change the payment period for the remaining land in any way.

Land disputes that the plaintiff made a contract with the defendant to divide the deed did not complete. And the plaintiff must pay the remaining amount of land within six months from the date the defendant informed the plaintiff in writing that the land plots have been segregated, the deed completed, so the defendant has a letter to the plaintiff to do. The contract is to buy and sell and pay the remaining land. It is not agreed upon. And to call for the plaintiff to repay before this time. Even the plaintiff does not follow. The plaintiff will not be promised. Defendant is not entitled to terminate the contract to the plaintiff. Later, when the land is completed, the plaintiff has demanded that the defendant transfer the land to the plaintiff under the contract and pay the land to the defendant. But the defendant has a written notice of termination of the plaintiff's land purchase agreement and confiscated the contractual collateral. As such, the defendant is in breach of contract. Plaintiffs like to force the defendant to comply with the contract.

Damages to the plaintiff to buy a claim in case the defendant can not sell the land dispute to the plaintiff under the contract. The deposit paid by the plaintiff to the defendant for the purchase of both land and the difference between the price of land disputes under the contract of land purchase and the price of land disputes in the current higher prices is a compensation for damage such as. The usual occurrence, but the plaintiff has no right to claim from the defendant. Damages are maintenance costs for facilities in the Northern Industrial Estate. Charged by the plaintiff. Although the defendant is charged to the benefit of the plaintiff. The amount of the plaintiff has paid it for the purpose of acquiring the land dispute is proprietary and used in the business of the plaintiff forever. When the defendant is in breach of contract, not transfer the land dispute as the plaintiff's ownership as agreed, the amount is considered to be beneficial to the plaintiff as the plaintiff's will. The maintenance fee for the facilities that the plaintiff paid to the defendant is considered as compensation for the defendant to pay back the plaintiff. The plaintiff has the right to claim from the defendant.

The plaintiff has a letter dated 23 May 1991 demanded that the defendant transfer the land disputes to the plaintiff under the land lease agreement, which calls for the defendant to pay the debt but not the defendant to settle the debt. And the defendant had a letter dated 28 August 1991 to terminate the contract to the plaintiff. It can be considered that the defendant defaulted on August 28, 2534, the plaintiff has the right to charge interest during the time of default from August 28, 1991 onwards at the rate of 7.5 percent per annum under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 224, first paragraph.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 9653/2539.
The plaintiff sent the paper to the defendant has the weight of the agreed size is to deliver the wrongly sold property of the agreed type is that the plaintiff does not pay the debt of the true purpose of the debt is not paid. Contract debt is not a defect in the property sold because the repayment under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 472 must be enforced according to the law. Commandments that by failing to pay the debt in general. The plaintiff's petition that the Court of Appeal did not accept the defendant's claim on the counterclaim, which is a defect that is defective or not legally unlawful when the Supreme Court has ruled that the dispute in this case is not operating debt. According to the contract is not a defect in the property sold because of repayment of the plaintiff's petition is not a substance. The case should be diagnosed.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4793/2539.
The purpose of the contract is that the condition or intent of the contract is expressed by the parties. November 11, 2534 by the defendant is the essence of the success and benefit that the plaintiff will receive under the contract, which if it is no longer useful to the plaintiff, the case must be enforced under the provisions of the Civil and Commercial Code. Section 387 is that when the defendant is not able to secure the contract. Appeal to the land dispute under the contract is not paid on the part of his duties, which is before the time of transfer of land disputes to the ownership of the plaintiff, the plaintiff must notify the defendant to provide a way. If the defendant fails to do so within the prescribed time, the plaintiff will terminate the contract when the plaintiff has not complied with the provisions of the law, the plaintiff has no right to terminate the contract. Will sell the termination of the plaintiff's attorney to the defendant in accordance with documents 20 to 25 so it is unlawful to contract between the plaintiff and the defendant is still effective. Therefore, the plaintiff has no right to call for the defendant to pay a deposit of 5,000,000 baht and the land cost of the defendant to withdraw from the plaintiff before 2,000,000 baht, because the plaintiff to the defendant in accordance with the terms of the contract to buy.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4355/2539.
The defendant agrees to pay monthly installments on the 15th of the month. The first three months are December 1993, January and February 1994, 10,000 baht per month from March 1994 onwards. The defendant paid the first month on December 15, 1993. The following month, the defendant paid on January 20, 1994 for 5,000 baht and on January 24, It's not the debt is considered within the defendant is in default, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment immediately in the amount that the defendant owed plus interest. The land that was taken will have the name of the property owner, but in the report of the seizure claimed to be Sin Somros in this class, so it is unlikely that the defendant will not participate in the case. Damage to the exercise of their existing rights, not the defendant's request to revoke the detention. The defendant filed a petition in the Supreme Court that the defendant made a debt payment to the plaintiff is complete, the plaintiff has the duty to withdraw the confiscation of the problem was just after the defendant filed a petition, both with the enforcement of the judgment in power. The Court of First Instance to issue a ruling under the Civil Procedure Code, Section 302 first paragraph, the defendant will file a petition to the court. Not directly.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 6056/2538.
A lease agreement is a contract that allows the parties to have rights and obligations that must be complied with if any party breaches the contract causing the other party to be harmed by the wrong party. To claim damages for damage as usual, but the breach of the contract under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 222, paragraph one. The defendant and the defendant will not have a contract that if the car is not sold at a price equal to the hire purchase price, the lease will be liable to the contract, but the defendant is liable for depreciation and Damages on the termination of the hire purchase contract by the plaintiff to sell the car and hire money together with the hire to pay the defendant to the plaintiff. Than the rental price set by the lease agreement, it is clear that the plaintiff was damaged, so that the Court of Appeal ruled that the damages in this section is the compensation that the plaintiff received and the defendant to pay damages to the plaintiff. Like it The case that the lessor must sue the tenant within 6 months from the date of return of the property leased under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 563 refers to the lawsuit in the case of the lessee to act. Tenants generally like to claim damages from the car, but this case is the plaintiff sued the plaintiff to sell the car disputes and bring money together with the rent. The purchase has been paid less than the lease fee under the Civil and Commercial Code or other law does not prescribe the age of 10 years in particular, according to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 164 was used at the time. The plaintiff may be enforceable by claim that the defendant did not terminate the defendant that the plaintiff sued the defendant to install a debt payment time to defend the defendant. The first defendant, the guarantor, was released from the liability in the appeal. The second defendant did not appeal or appeal in this issue, so it is not raised in the appeal class, neither is the problem with the. Article 249 The Supreme Court shall not accept the application of the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 66/2538.
When the contract of sale of tobacco has scheduled repayment of outstanding advances in installments in the tobacco production season, the defendant, the seller is not paid to pay the advances paid to the plaintiff. In case of breach of contract, the right of the contracting party to force the party to breach the contract is to force the contractor to pay. According to the plaintiff claims that defendants have the right to sue to enforce payment in advance due to the plaintiff, even if the plaintiff did not terminate the contract.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 4337/2536.
The installer does not pay the debt on time and the amount specified in the contract. The lease is considered the lease. The leasing party would like to exercise the right to terminate the contract under the lease, but the lease will continue to pay for the hire purchase. It shows that the lease contract does not comply with the terms of the contract is material. It is not considered that the failure to repay the hire purchase debt on time and the amount specified in the contract is a breach of contract, the contractor will terminate the contract when it has complied. Civil and Commercial Code Section 387
Judgment of the Supreme Court 3713/2535. The agreement in the mortgage agreement. In addition to the plaintiff is liable for 390,000 baht, then be liable for the interest that the debtor has defaulted, so that the plaintiff asked for a mortgage of 390,000 baht, which does not appear that the plaintiff offered to pay interest, the defendant would refuse to accept the debt and refused. To redeem the mortgage. Documentary examination of the defendant's defense issues, which is responsible for the examination later. I did not bring the documents to the plaintiff's testimony, the defendant has the right to submit the document.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 124/2534.
The defendant hired the car from the plaintiff and issued 12 checks in advance to pay installments that require payment of 12 installments when the 9th installment to the 12th billing cycle. The defendant will default to the plaintiff who would like to exercise the right to terminate the contract under Article 8, but it appears that the plaintiff does not accept the debt repayment as the essence, continue to receive repayment. In the event that the default of the lease and the owner of any default is not considered to be a waiver of another default. But the plaintiff's acceptance of the payment of the rent paid by the defendant. It is considered that the plaintiff and the defendant is intended to restrain the original commitment. It does not assume that the default is not broken in the contract and not terminate the contract. The defendant did not pay the hire purchase from the 9th, so it can not be held that the defendant breached the contract.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 3242/2533.
The plaintiff employed a defendant to install air conditioning. When the contract expires. The defendants were not equipped with air conditioning. Later, the defendant made a note that the defendant was unable to perform the contractual air conditioning installation. Defendant to terminate the contract and agree to pay damages under the contract to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has the right to claim damages from the defendant. For damages is the compensation that the defendant agreed to pay the notice of termination. It is not a penalties because it is not a compensation agreement before the debt is not paid.

Judgment of the Supreme Court 1302/2533.
The plaintiff has the right to terminate the contract between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, the defendant pledged to secure the pledge. Even before the termination of the defendant's contract. Antenna is already available, but the plaintiff did not receive it because there is no antenna under the contract of sale that the defendant did not deliver the contract. It is not the defendant delivered to the plaintiff is not complete or inaccurate, the plaintiff has no right to charge a daily penalty from the defendant.

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More