Section 290 if the debt is paid, and will share many individuals who have good standing. A good many individuals who are payable when a case is suspected. You that each debtor is liable only to the creditors equally and everyone is like to be, but just as equal parts.
Section 291 if several persons are required to pay debt by air Each person must pay debt completely know that Even as the creditor would like to receive Debt entirely, but only once. (Ie, joint accounts) are good creditors paid its debt, but one entirely or in part by his or her discretion, but will select all but the debtor is still bound to stay. Around until all debt is paid entirely completed.
Section 292 of the accounts together, one would have to pay the debt. Benefit other accounts the same way, you shall apply to any debt which should act instead. Instead of placing the property and debt set-off by
Accounts together, one has the right to demand how Receivables others will take it to a set-off rights do not find it.
Section 293 of the debtors forgiven together, one that would be for the benefit of other accounts of the extent of the debtor to be released unless agreed to otherwise.
Section 294 of the creditors, the debtor defaults, one that would share. A benefit to the debtor by other persons.
Section 295 any actual text. Unless specified in Section 292 to Section 294, when the foot is a common debtor, it is indeed to any person. The pros and cons, but only to the debtor that person. Unless it appears that the alien Conditions of the debt itself.
And that to this Especially when it is that shall apply to the notice of default to the claims raised fault settlement impossible, which together accounts for one party. The prescription Or interruption of the prescription is stopped and the claims swallow normally. Together with debt
Section 296 of the debtor are all together. Him and me. Are liable to equal parts, unless otherwise specified. If the debtor together one that will be payable. Shall be called. Remove from people that do not know that How much is the lack of. Other accounts that need the parts, it must be used. If any joint accounts. Creditor debt relief to release a joint then. The debtor. That person should be required to pay debts to creditors, it went to the fold.
Section 297 if the promise is one which several persons jointly. Shall be bound in a debt know that If a case is suspected. You that they will be liable as a joint debtor. Even the one that will share the repayment.
Section 298 if several persons have the right to demand repayment by Similar, each person may be called to pay the debt entirely know that Even to the debtor. Remember to pay debt completely but only once. (That is payable together) Well, you will pay that debt to the debtor, creditors, but only one time as it is selected. Of this Article shall become enforceable. Despite all the creditors who have filed a lawsuit. Paid on taxable debt.
Section 299 of the creditors together one late penalty that would be payable to each other.
If the claims. And liabilities shall be normally mingle in creditors. Common one. The rights of other creditors, the debtor would have had to be The end of the suspension.
Also, you, the provisions of Section 292, Section 293 and Section 295 shall apply mutatis mutandis with. Especially, it is said. Although creditors together. One claim will be transferred to another person. I find the wound. The rights of other creditors who do not.
Section 300 of the combined entity creditors. Each person that you love. Will receive a payment equal parts, unless otherwise specified.
Section 301 if several persons share of debt payments, which will not. You that those persons shall be liable as a joint debtor.
Section 302 if the debt is not paid and will share. There are several persons creditors. If they are not a creditor that the debtor together Asrng you have to pay the debt, but to benefit. To those persons. All together And creditors, each debt is paid, but to be. Benefit all the people together, only creditors Furthermore, each run. Place the property the debtor is indebted to them for the benefit of creditors everywhere. People with time. If the property is not appropriate to be placed, then sent to the court receivership, which is up from.
In addition, the actual text at the foot of any one creditor only to find you, or harm to other creditors who do not.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 271/2552.
The contract stated that credit card. If the bank plaintiff to approve the supplementary card holders to the main card any card holder, both will be jointly liable as joint debtors in the debt arising from the use of credit cards is that an agreement, the two defendants signed. acknowledge that the defendant would show the two agree to join their liability to the liability of the defendant, a member of a credit card with a key card from credit card subscription. The plaintiff has accused the two as joint debtors in the debt that each person is created as a result of using a credit card can not be separated according to Commercial Code, Section 297.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2569/2551.
Thi company checks dispute to reduce sales to the plaintiff by signing endorsement. Plaintiff who is lawfully After the bank refused to pay the check. Defendants who are ordered to pay and its endorsement of Rama must jointly liable to the plaintiff under Civil and Commercial Code, Section 914 and Section 967, paragraph one of Article 989 which can be considered as liable as joint debtors on the plaintiff to do so. compromise agreement, which holds that new debt is another plaintiff will have claims for payment to the Company Rama person under the compromise agreement. No right to call the company liable for debts Thi dispute the check again. The plaintiff's right to claim against the defendant as a liability payable to the plaintiff in Check the debt would put an end to the dispute with This is because debt claims on the disputed plaintiff's check was then suspended for the following.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2111/2551.
Creditors and debtors than 2 Sat. Jointly contract a loan guarantee of the plaintiff is liable as joint debtors under Commercial Code Section 291 and Section 682, paragraph two, if creditor payments to the plaintiff. Creditor shall have the right to recourse is taken from the accounts 1, the accounts of First Instance under Article 693, paragraph one, and subrogation of the plaintiff's recourse taken to the accounts 2, which is secured together as equal parts in accordance with Section 229 (. 3) Section 296 and also on loan at 1 and 2 are decisive court receivership creditor has the right to apply for settlement. For a number of which he may exercise a recourse to the debtor and the second one in the future, either the number or the case may be. Unless the plaintiff has the right to request payment in full amount which the debtor has a 1 or 2, then the Bankruptcy Act BE 2483, Section 101 on Wed, the transferee company claims the plaintiff was. apply for debt settlement. From the floor towards the debtor and filed an application for repayment of debts which are secured to the two accounts are already full. Creditors have no right to obtain payment for the exercise of which he may pursue. Premiums in the future on two accounts.
Creditor and the debtor has entered into two secured debts of a debtor by T. confess to a joint debtor. Creditors and debtors, who secured second with the same debt shall be liable as joint debtors under the Commercial Code, Section 682, paragraph two, when the provisions are not in any way guarantee the liabilities of a guarantor to each other. It therefore requires a general rule under Section 229 and Section 296 of the T. accepting payments from two accounts amounting to $ 500,000 and forgiven by the debtor to withdraw filed only two would be useful to the extent the debtor's creditors. 2, which was released to only The second refers to the child shall not be liable T. longer because the remaining debt for the debtor to hold the 2 and then Section 340, so if the debt to the creditor T. just do not use it. take recourse to the two accounts longer so creditors can not obtain payment from the debtor's property Division 2, has.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2569/2551.
When the plaintiff's compromise agreement with the endorsement Rama would make the same debt by the end of the check block. And allows each party has the right as shown in the compromise agreement which can be considered a new debt. The plaintiff will have claims for payment to his company Thi compromise agreement. No right to call the company and the defendant Rama as liable for debts payable by check again.
The Commercial Code, Section 291 states, although the creditors have the right to demand payment from the debtor, but only one or analysis, but by the end of time as it is selected. But all accounts, it must still bind the people until all debt is paid. Even completely finished. If a creditor has the right to use the existing debt that the debtor must all jointly liable for debts, but for this case was the settlement check has been suspended under Pra end of this Compromise settlement, the plaintiff made with the plaintiff's claims Thi existing accounts with the others in the same debt would stop with the end of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 292, paragraph one
Judgement of the Supreme Court 3506/2551.
Even achieve that result from the negligence of the defendants 1 and 2 together, and no less than, but the defendant, 1 and 2 can cause damage to the cars of the plaintiff, a third party must be considered. Accused 1 and 2, have all contributed to cause damage to all such defendants 1 and 2 must be jointly liable for any damage incurred as joint debtors by defendants 1 and 2, or one is liable. the full amount of damages by the plaintiff to share liability to the plaintiff by the defendant, 3 the insurer does not need a co-defendant liable for the consequences of abuse, as well.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6087/2550.
To determine whether the agreement or in a form contract, unfair contract terms in accordance with Act on unfair contract terms the first paragraph of Article 4 or not. Must consider whether the agreement as a result, the business or profession or trade. The contract finished. Or the buyer deposits consumption advantage. Or other party and not unreasonable or third paragraph of Section 4 deals with the nature or the other party to perform or receive. Burden than ordinary prudence should be expected as normal. Agreement that may be considered to be an advantage to the other party. When the contract guarantees that the second defendant is liable to pay debts instead of a defendant without the defendant claims that a debt which is set before the second defendant is liable to a debtor with the Commercial Code, Section 291, which according Section 691 requires that the guarantor is liable with the debtor has no right under Section 688, Section 689 and Section 690 of the guarantor has no right under the said Section. Is not a burden than the law. As a result, the defendant was not at practice or two more than the burden of ordinary prudence should be expected in the ordinary course of tradition. Guarantees in any way. The second set of defendant liability under the law is not unfair contract terms. Although this appeal will not be an admonition to lift each other and with like force in the central court, but the problem is. Act on unfair contract terms in relation with the public order. The Supreme Court has been diagnosed according to the second paragraph of Section 225 P.wi.po.. Act on Establishment of Labour Court and Labour Court Procedure, Section 31.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 3152/2550.
When the Court of First Instance sentenced the company since payment to the plaintiff with interest. Following the date of the filing until the payment is made. Finally, the case has reached. The two defendants are joint debtors must share liability. But the plaintiff would prefer to receive payment entirely, but only once and that Accounts together, one that settlement. Would be helpful to other people with accounts receivable, as defined in Civil and Commercial Code, Section 291 and Section 292 to prevent the plaintiff's debt forced the company to remove redundant since the other cases with two defendants in this case. Is the responsibility of paying the debts of the two defendants jointly liable to the plaintiff. Founded in conjunction with the Judgement of this case.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 1349/2550.
Both defendants owe the plaintiff the Court allows. The two defendants admitted that owe the plaintiff separate and so amount of 1,000,000 baht and interest of 187,093 baht and the plaintiff agree that the two defendants installment includes 10 period if the two defendants defaulted willing to think the penalty rate of 7.5 percent per year, the two defendants did not. agree to comply with the Court. Both the defendant is liable to pay the debt to the plaintiff under the Supreme Court allowed it. If the plaintiff is a joint debtor is paid its debt by one. Entirely or in part by his or her discretion, but will select But the debtor continued to be bound in every person until the debt is paid entirely completed and the Commercial Code, Section 291 on the second defendant had not paid the debt under the Supreme Court said a defendant is still liable to pay. Judgement of the plaintiff until the debt is paid back to finish The plaintiff then sued the debt that the two defendants to be bankrupt.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 386/2550.
2 The plaintiff sued the defendant as the defendant violated an employer as a defendant in two of the employer violated the employment. And the three defendants jointly liable as a recipient Prauanpaicgmhun indemnity liability of the defendant and the defendant a 2, 3, is different. For the defendants 1 and 2, the age of 1 year from the date the victim knew of the infringement and should be aware of the need for compensation under feeder Commercial Code, Section 448, paragraph one of the defendants 3 and 2 years old. from the date of casualty, according to Article 882, paragraph one, when age, sued the defendant, one of two defendants to three can be separated from each other under section 295 given age as you or a penalty only to debtors who are accused of 3 does. Age may not be raised under Section 448, paragraph one of the battle.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 8215/2549.
Guarantee agreement states that if the defendant first fails to pay tax on the plaintiff informed of the tax that the defendant, one must pay to the defendant to two known defendants 2 to be paid to the plaintiff within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notification. Without calling for a defendant to pay before an agreement is a case of two defendants who are taking the guaranteed right to request that a defendant who is a debtor to pay first. Kathy and taking the ultimate display to force the plaintiff to pay debts out of assets of a defendant before the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 688 and 689 which causes the plaintiff to the defendant claims that one or the second one. debt entirely by the defendant, 1 and 2, shall remain liable to the plaintiff until the plaintiff will be paid back completely finished second defendant is liable to a defendant as joint debtors under Section 691 Commercial Code.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6315/2549.
Civil and Commercial Code, Section 457 applies to the parties in the contracts. This is a matter between the buyer and the seller only The registration fee right of redemption to be paid by Por land is state money collected from farmers as compensation by the State to serve the people who Por land subject to section 104 the applicant is free of charge. Which debt incurred by the law and look at the share of debt is not paid. Without regard to whether the applicant during the registration of rights and juristic act with Parties agree that any party is to pay, so the plaintiff shall be entitled to a buyer or seller to one or two payments. The lack of tradition in all.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 3932/2549.
The plaintiff sued the defendant, a hire-purchase agreement guarantees defendants the two defendants claimed that the second counterclaim defendant a lease payment is complete. When a defendant is dead. Plaintiff's name to be registered heirs of a defendant who owned the car hire. The claim that the plaintiff argues that a defendant's right to argue for the rights of the defendant Yes 2 No 2 No authority counterclaim defendant. The second defendant's counterclaim is not related to the original indictment. Not included with the original indictment. And the guarantee agreement states that the second defendant is liable with the defendant at a joint debtors that Affects only that the plaintiff is entitled to a payment from a defendant or the defendant, one of two entirely under Commercial Code Section 291 and the second defendant could not exercise as stated in the last year. . CCC Section 688, 689 and 690 only to find that the second defendant's right to prosecute a defendant with no replacement.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 5035/2549.
The plaintiff and the defendant, 2 and 3 are a guarantee of a defendant to the District Finance Corporation will not even guarantee the same. The plaintiff and the defendant, 2 and 3, it is liable to a debtor corporation capital district with Commercial Code, Section 682, paragraph two, when the plaintiff corporation debt to finance a district representative to the defendant and the plaintiff 4,838,567.40 Baht. subrogation of the Corporation would fund district took recourse to the defendant, 2 and 3 as equal parts in accordance with Section 229 (3) and Section 296 defendants 2 and 3 are each liable to the plaintiff Baht 1,612,855.80 plus interest. rate of 7.5 percent per year from the date on which the plaintiff paid money to the District Finance Corporation until payment is made.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2765/2548.
The first defendant is the husband accused the two have been signed as a witness in a construction contract in the land of the two defendants. Circumstances where the defendant is not given consent to a binding contract and headed to the plaintiff as a joint debtor, even accused the two parties will sign a contract in the same matter. Housing debts in the defendant both intended to continue to live that would bind the defendant as a plaintiff shall have the power to sue a defendant jointly liable under it.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6107/2548.
Cases before the final, then it The plaintiff sued the defendant for the enforcement of this case, the third defendant in the lawsuit jointly liable with the company before Rama, the first defendant to other defendants in the case before. In this case the defendant as a guarantor of mortgage and land title deed No. 60775 with the building. A debt security of a defendant in the case before the District Court and cases before the Court to the defendant and the defendant, a case with the other defendants in the case before sharing payments to the plaintiff. If you do not pay the mortgage, confiscation of land and mortgage the land of the other defendants. Auction payment to the plaintiff. If payment is not enough money to seize other assets of three defendants in the case before payment in full.
The plaintiff filed this lawsuit to force the mortgage for the land title deed No. 12981 with the building where the defendant is insured mortgage securities increased to the plaintiff. The force is requested that if the defendant did not redeem the mortgage debt in the case before the Court. Asked to enforce the mortgage debt in the case of land to the plaintiff in the case before the Court. If the auction does not have enough money to pay debts. Have a defendant to seize other assets of the auction proceeds to debt repayment to the plaintiff until the end.
Are on land that the plaintiff sued the defendant for the enforcement of mortgage in the case before the case is different converts well. Although the defendant is mortgaged as collateral for a debt that companies must pay to Rama by the same plaintiff. But when the claim is based on the principle of a lawsuit alleging the plaintiff's request to force the defendant. Liability case with previous cases, issues will be different diagnosis that is This case is the issue in dispute. Defendant over land title deed No. 12981 with buildings insurance company debt Thi offense shall be liable in the case before, and the plaintiff had not paid back or not. The case before the issue by the plaintiff's complaint that Title deed and mortgage guarantees defendants No. 60775 with the building. Debt insurance company must pay to Rama plaintiff and the defendant may be sued with other defendants in the case before the liability. Payment to the plaintiff or not. If it is not about removing the singer sued the same parties in relation to each other. Diagnosis ago By the same grounds, which will be filed with the style as unique as P.wi.po. Section 148 plaintiffs filed this case it is not unique to cases filed before the final.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6040/2545.
The contract is significant that this contract is made between the defendant, which further in Agreement called the "Employer" party and the defendant together, and the plaintiff, which both companies hereinafter referred to as "the Contractor" the other party to the text of the agreement requires the plaintiff and the defendant together with as a common "contract". Because the work to be done to the building construction that will not cause segregation. How any new building. Much. And the defendant to pay the wages it paid in the period. Does not require that the plaintiff and the defendant will settle with each other by how much. Continue to pay together. Even in the first payment to be divided equally for each period. It is solely for the convenience of the plaintiff and the defendant together only to find it refreshing change. As a convert impossible. The plaintiff and the defendant continued to have as a creditor with the debt paid. The defendant shall be entitled to payment to the plaintiff or the defendant with any creditor who is. Time as it is selected by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 298.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6829/2543.
Although Ms. Barni with the defendant. And other guarantees will jointly guarantee the debt reduction agreement to sell its paper bag check with Thai and the plaintiff will receive payment from Mrs Supannee some Even forgiven by the plaintiff withdrew the civil lawsuit Ms. Barni such. The plaintiff has the debt under the Supreme Court Case No. 23817/2532 red sentenced under the permit By Ms. Barni not become a debtor under the Supreme Court with To sue the defendant to a bankruptcy case. Ms. Barni with the debtor is not a defendant in the lawsuit the plaintiff's debt. Although the plaintiff to be forgiven Ms. Barni, it is not the case for the plaintiff forgiven. Accounts with the defendant under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 340 and Section 293.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2709/2543.
If creditors are several debtors. Debtors, creditors will sue and be sued, any how. Is indeed the rights of creditors to choose the action. The plaintiff, a creditor has the right to sue other receivables are not required by the bankruptcy filing by the defendant. Both the plaintiff did not sue the defendant in the bankruptcy case. The defendant is indeed the one that you will not have to become bankrupt. And even though the debtor later people will become bankrupt matter. Defendants have not free from liability to plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the defendant has the right to be the case. Without regard to whether the defendant must request a settlement in bankruptcy or not. And will lose the right to recourse or not. Because of the recourse is the debtor themselves. Case holding that the plaintiff is not entitled to sue the defendant in bad faith.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2013/2542.
Because automobile collision caused by the negligence of the defendant and the defendant, a 6 by both parties. Although both sides would not have intentionally or willfully violated the plaintiff's share even. But when damage to the plaintiff, a third party defendant must be considered one and the six defendants have all contributed to cause such damage all together. And the same damage. Each person who violates a joint liability for any damage incurred by Commercial Code, Section 301, Section 291 of the fifth defendant, a recipient Prauanpaicgmhun. Be jointly liable in damages to the plaintiff and the defendant with others as joint debtors.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 8533/2542.
A defendant must be liable for damages in violation of the information age of 1 year from the date of the injured student to abuse and should know who will be using the product. Silk replacement under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 448, paragraph one of the two defendants must be liable for damages under insurance contracts. The age of 2 years from the date of casualty, according to Section 882 paragraph one shows that the age of two defendants sued can be separated from each other as well as civil. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 295 states that as you age or as a penalty only to debtors who are thereupon Prosecution of the defendants liable for a data breach is the first year would expire, as you only to the defendant that a lawsuit is unrelated to the two defendants of liability insurance under the age of 2 years from the date of casualty.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 625/2542.
When the plaintiff and the guarantee Sat share of L in the amount of 1,000,000 baht and liabilities of the plaintiff. S. limited times would limit the interest rate with the Corporation plc. Be liable to the defendant. But not exceeding the rate at which the defendant has the right to think according to the law of the repayment agreement Sat guarantee the defendant and the defendant forgiven for 1,800,000 baht on Sat April 18, 2533 the plaintiff as a debtor with a benefit with the Sat. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 292, paragraph one, 293, even 11 years later, another 2 months and 23 days, the plaintiff sued the defendant is insolvent. But the limit on the plaintiff to the defendant was liable for only a limited guarantee of one million U.S. contract with both. Sat any payment to the defendant under a guarantee agreement to 1,800,000 baht, and even then the plaintiff will be liable under the mortgage insurance companies l debt of more interest in the amount of 200,000 baht with any outstanding liability to the plaintiff to the defendant when including principal and interest then there is no way up. 15,332,017.82 baht and the accused Lecture sued in bankruptcy cases that the plaintiff is also liable to the defendant with the Corporation plc. More 15,015,517.82 U.S. by describing the amount the plaintiff is liable under a guarantee agreement and that. Attorney of the accused to be testimony in the class. Another consideration that must be jointly liable to the plaintiff company sued the money until l 15,332,071.82 U.S. District Court receivership until the final plaintiff, and sentenced to bankrupt the plaintiff. Damage perpetrated by negligence in calculating the outstanding amount of the plaintiff. And an exercise in bad faith.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6251/2541.
Loan contracts specify the amount of the plaintiff to recover, and the other lenders to the defendant, a different number in the amount not equal to, respectively. The plaintiff and the other lenders participating in the debt separately. Creditors can not be shared. The contract did not require that the prosecution plaintiff must obtain the consent or see Like from a lender before you lose with the prosecution. In accordance with the provisions of the law, creditors did not indicate that many lenders anyone. One must have the consent or approval from a lender other people before you bring a lawsuit, so the plaintiff has the power to prosecute this without the consent of the Lenders party before the defendant four to. with interest that the defendant. Receive a loan under the program loan is not due lack of working capital assumed. The plaintiff is a breach of contract. The defendant shall not be liable in excess interest rate of 13.5 percent year on Appeals and the defendant. Similarly, this fourth appeal, which was diagnosed Sreouthrnntprc 3. Article four defendants appeal that the four defendants are not liable for interest rate up to 13.5 percent per year, all four defendants did not raise the admonition in the Court of First Instance and the like. So do not get diagnosed for a petition that accused the four interest rate higher than the plaintiff should be the plaintiff. Size analysis of investment mistakes. The four defendants made hundreds of million of debt and the plaintiff did not appear to be. Special damage is such a thing. The four are accused. Not be liable for more than 13.5 percent per year, is an at Has not been raised by the parties and the like in the first instance Sreouthrnntprc third issue is also not a problem with public order to the Supreme Court has not been diagnosed.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 4712/2539.
Because the collision caused by the negligence of the defendant and the deceased as an employee The two defendants, no less than the same even though the defendant and the deceased is a difference of them. Any negligence, but due to the negligence of the defendant and a deceased No less than those above, then a defendant must be jointly liable for the defendant to 2 to Full compensation of the plaintiff as joint debtors.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 5709/2537.
Code of Civil Procedure Section 271 states that creditors must be requested under the Supreme Court to force the case to the debtor under the Supreme Court within ten years. From the date of the Court and to request enforcement. The plaintiff, a creditor under the Supreme Court would have taken a lawsuit to force steps complete within that time period is. Meant to ask the Court of First Instance issued before execution. The next step must inform the court that issued Enforcement Officer execution means then. To discuss the request to seize the property of Enforcement Officer judgment debtor if the debtor to indicate that many people want to seize any assets of the debtor. The plaintiff requested the defendant to the execution means, both within ten years from the date of the sentence. But retaining the exclusive property of the defendant at an auction and not enough money to pay debts. Although the plaintiff has not taken enforcement to the property of the defendant but the plaintiff stated that 2 per Enforcement Officer paying the defendant's request to seize the land. 2, within 10 years from the date of the sentence. But because the land is outside the civil court Enforcement Officer of First Instance has issued a letter asking the Court of First Instance, the Court Sikhio the land is located allows execution instead. The Court of Enforcement Officer Sikhio to seize the land when it Is the process of operation of the Enforcement Officer. Although the Court Enforcement Officer Sikhio to seize the land of the two defendants over the ten years from the date of the sentence. When the plaintiff, a creditor under the Supreme Court to perform their duty is complete within ten years from the date the sentence is considered that the plaintiff has requested the execution under the Supreme Court within ten years from the date of the sentence under the Code of Civil Procedure section 271, then the plaintiff is entitled to the enforcement of land out of the second defendant was.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 1120/2535.
The four plaintiffs sued the two defendants jointly liable for the data breach occurred at the same time. The four plaintiffs would have shared interest in the value of the case. Prosecution is shared by the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 59, even though debt is caused by the defendant violated a loss, but at the same time that the two defendants would be liable to each plaintiff. Would be violated depending on the results of the individual plaintiffs received from the data breach in respect of damages The plaintiff was not a creditor the two defendants together. Therefore, the plaintiff must clearly describe the action that each plaintiff is entitled to the damages from two defendants that plaintiff's description of how to sue the two defendants liable together Compensate the plaintiff. Considered to be a force not clearly describe the request of the plaintiff's complaint is ambiguous.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 11161/2511.
Of the Code of Civil Procedure Section 290, paragraph two of that. Do not allow the court to request an average property. Unless the court that the applicant can not take payments from other assets. Judgement debtor under the terms of the judgment debtor means debtors in this Court by the property seized in this case. If no other property. The applicant also asked the average amount the property sold. Find imply judgment debtor in another case that the applicant does not mean winning the case (refer the petition 176/2494).
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6251/2541.
Contract Loan No. disputed that the plaintiff brought action to specify a limit to recovery of the plaintiff and the lender other support to the defendant, one on each of the limit are not equal and the order of the plaintiff and the lender more involved in debt. the separate Creditors can not be shared. The contract did not require that the prosecution plaintiff must have been. Consent or approval from a lender with bad before you can prosecute. In accordance with the provisions of the law, creditors are not many of them stating that the lender one must be. Consent or approval from a lender before filing another lawsuit, so the plaintiff has the power to prosecute without this. Consent from other lenders before
Section 291 if several persons are required to pay debt by air Each person must pay debt completely know that Even as the creditor would like to receive Debt entirely, but only once. (Ie, joint accounts) are good creditors paid its debt, but one entirely or in part by his or her discretion, but will select all but the debtor is still bound to stay. Around until all debt is paid entirely completed.
Section 292 of the accounts together, one would have to pay the debt. Benefit other accounts the same way, you shall apply to any debt which should act instead. Instead of placing the property and debt set-off by
Accounts together, one has the right to demand how Receivables others will take it to a set-off rights do not find it.
Section 293 of the debtors forgiven together, one that would be for the benefit of other accounts of the extent of the debtor to be released unless agreed to otherwise.
Section 294 of the creditors, the debtor defaults, one that would share. A benefit to the debtor by other persons.
Section 295 any actual text. Unless specified in Section 292 to Section 294, when the foot is a common debtor, it is indeed to any person. The pros and cons, but only to the debtor that person. Unless it appears that the alien Conditions of the debt itself.
And that to this Especially when it is that shall apply to the notice of default to the claims raised fault settlement impossible, which together accounts for one party. The prescription Or interruption of the prescription is stopped and the claims swallow normally. Together with debt
Section 296 of the debtor are all together. Him and me. Are liable to equal parts, unless otherwise specified. If the debtor together one that will be payable. Shall be called. Remove from people that do not know that How much is the lack of. Other accounts that need the parts, it must be used. If any joint accounts. Creditor debt relief to release a joint then. The debtor. That person should be required to pay debts to creditors, it went to the fold.
Section 297 if the promise is one which several persons jointly. Shall be bound in a debt know that If a case is suspected. You that they will be liable as a joint debtor. Even the one that will share the repayment.
Section 298 if several persons have the right to demand repayment by Similar, each person may be called to pay the debt entirely know that Even to the debtor. Remember to pay debt completely but only once. (That is payable together) Well, you will pay that debt to the debtor, creditors, but only one time as it is selected. Of this Article shall become enforceable. Despite all the creditors who have filed a lawsuit. Paid on taxable debt.
Section 299 of the creditors together one late penalty that would be payable to each other.
If the claims. And liabilities shall be normally mingle in creditors. Common one. The rights of other creditors, the debtor would have had to be The end of the suspension.
Also, you, the provisions of Section 292, Section 293 and Section 295 shall apply mutatis mutandis with. Especially, it is said. Although creditors together. One claim will be transferred to another person. I find the wound. The rights of other creditors who do not.
Section 300 of the combined entity creditors. Each person that you love. Will receive a payment equal parts, unless otherwise specified.
Section 301 if several persons share of debt payments, which will not. You that those persons shall be liable as a joint debtor.
Section 302 if the debt is not paid and will share. There are several persons creditors. If they are not a creditor that the debtor together Asrng you have to pay the debt, but to benefit. To those persons. All together And creditors, each debt is paid, but to be. Benefit all the people together, only creditors Furthermore, each run. Place the property the debtor is indebted to them for the benefit of creditors everywhere. People with time. If the property is not appropriate to be placed, then sent to the court receivership, which is up from.
In addition, the actual text at the foot of any one creditor only to find you, or harm to other creditors who do not.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 271/2552.
The contract stated that credit card. If the bank plaintiff to approve the supplementary card holders to the main card any card holder, both will be jointly liable as joint debtors in the debt arising from the use of credit cards is that an agreement, the two defendants signed. acknowledge that the defendant would show the two agree to join their liability to the liability of the defendant, a member of a credit card with a key card from credit card subscription. The plaintiff has accused the two as joint debtors in the debt that each person is created as a result of using a credit card can not be separated according to Commercial Code, Section 297.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2569/2551.
Thi company checks dispute to reduce sales to the plaintiff by signing endorsement. Plaintiff who is lawfully After the bank refused to pay the check. Defendants who are ordered to pay and its endorsement of Rama must jointly liable to the plaintiff under Civil and Commercial Code, Section 914 and Section 967, paragraph one of Article 989 which can be considered as liable as joint debtors on the plaintiff to do so. compromise agreement, which holds that new debt is another plaintiff will have claims for payment to the Company Rama person under the compromise agreement. No right to call the company liable for debts Thi dispute the check again. The plaintiff's right to claim against the defendant as a liability payable to the plaintiff in Check the debt would put an end to the dispute with This is because debt claims on the disputed plaintiff's check was then suspended for the following.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2111/2551.
Creditors and debtors than 2 Sat. Jointly contract a loan guarantee of the plaintiff is liable as joint debtors under Commercial Code Section 291 and Section 682, paragraph two, if creditor payments to the plaintiff. Creditor shall have the right to recourse is taken from the accounts 1, the accounts of First Instance under Article 693, paragraph one, and subrogation of the plaintiff's recourse taken to the accounts 2, which is secured together as equal parts in accordance with Section 229 (. 3) Section 296 and also on loan at 1 and 2 are decisive court receivership creditor has the right to apply for settlement. For a number of which he may exercise a recourse to the debtor and the second one in the future, either the number or the case may be. Unless the plaintiff has the right to request payment in full amount which the debtor has a 1 or 2, then the Bankruptcy Act BE 2483, Section 101 on Wed, the transferee company claims the plaintiff was. apply for debt settlement. From the floor towards the debtor and filed an application for repayment of debts which are secured to the two accounts are already full. Creditors have no right to obtain payment for the exercise of which he may pursue. Premiums in the future on two accounts.
Creditor and the debtor has entered into two secured debts of a debtor by T. confess to a joint debtor. Creditors and debtors, who secured second with the same debt shall be liable as joint debtors under the Commercial Code, Section 682, paragraph two, when the provisions are not in any way guarantee the liabilities of a guarantor to each other. It therefore requires a general rule under Section 229 and Section 296 of the T. accepting payments from two accounts amounting to $ 500,000 and forgiven by the debtor to withdraw filed only two would be useful to the extent the debtor's creditors. 2, which was released to only The second refers to the child shall not be liable T. longer because the remaining debt for the debtor to hold the 2 and then Section 340, so if the debt to the creditor T. just do not use it. take recourse to the two accounts longer so creditors can not obtain payment from the debtor's property Division 2, has.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2569/2551.
When the plaintiff's compromise agreement with the endorsement Rama would make the same debt by the end of the check block. And allows each party has the right as shown in the compromise agreement which can be considered a new debt. The plaintiff will have claims for payment to his company Thi compromise agreement. No right to call the company and the defendant Rama as liable for debts payable by check again.
The Commercial Code, Section 291 states, although the creditors have the right to demand payment from the debtor, but only one or analysis, but by the end of time as it is selected. But all accounts, it must still bind the people until all debt is paid. Even completely finished. If a creditor has the right to use the existing debt that the debtor must all jointly liable for debts, but for this case was the settlement check has been suspended under Pra end of this Compromise settlement, the plaintiff made with the plaintiff's claims Thi existing accounts with the others in the same debt would stop with the end of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 292, paragraph one
Judgement of the Supreme Court 3506/2551.
Even achieve that result from the negligence of the defendants 1 and 2 together, and no less than, but the defendant, 1 and 2 can cause damage to the cars of the plaintiff, a third party must be considered. Accused 1 and 2, have all contributed to cause damage to all such defendants 1 and 2 must be jointly liable for any damage incurred as joint debtors by defendants 1 and 2, or one is liable. the full amount of damages by the plaintiff to share liability to the plaintiff by the defendant, 3 the insurer does not need a co-defendant liable for the consequences of abuse, as well.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6087/2550.
To determine whether the agreement or in a form contract, unfair contract terms in accordance with Act on unfair contract terms the first paragraph of Article 4 or not. Must consider whether the agreement as a result, the business or profession or trade. The contract finished. Or the buyer deposits consumption advantage. Or other party and not unreasonable or third paragraph of Section 4 deals with the nature or the other party to perform or receive. Burden than ordinary prudence should be expected as normal. Agreement that may be considered to be an advantage to the other party. When the contract guarantees that the second defendant is liable to pay debts instead of a defendant without the defendant claims that a debt which is set before the second defendant is liable to a debtor with the Commercial Code, Section 291, which according Section 691 requires that the guarantor is liable with the debtor has no right under Section 688, Section 689 and Section 690 of the guarantor has no right under the said Section. Is not a burden than the law. As a result, the defendant was not at practice or two more than the burden of ordinary prudence should be expected in the ordinary course of tradition. Guarantees in any way. The second set of defendant liability under the law is not unfair contract terms. Although this appeal will not be an admonition to lift each other and with like force in the central court, but the problem is. Act on unfair contract terms in relation with the public order. The Supreme Court has been diagnosed according to the second paragraph of Section 225 P.wi.po.. Act on Establishment of Labour Court and Labour Court Procedure, Section 31.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 3152/2550.
When the Court of First Instance sentenced the company since payment to the plaintiff with interest. Following the date of the filing until the payment is made. Finally, the case has reached. The two defendants are joint debtors must share liability. But the plaintiff would prefer to receive payment entirely, but only once and that Accounts together, one that settlement. Would be helpful to other people with accounts receivable, as defined in Civil and Commercial Code, Section 291 and Section 292 to prevent the plaintiff's debt forced the company to remove redundant since the other cases with two defendants in this case. Is the responsibility of paying the debts of the two defendants jointly liable to the plaintiff. Founded in conjunction with the Judgement of this case.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 1349/2550.
Both defendants owe the plaintiff the Court allows. The two defendants admitted that owe the plaintiff separate and so amount of 1,000,000 baht and interest of 187,093 baht and the plaintiff agree that the two defendants installment includes 10 period if the two defendants defaulted willing to think the penalty rate of 7.5 percent per year, the two defendants did not. agree to comply with the Court. Both the defendant is liable to pay the debt to the plaintiff under the Supreme Court allowed it. If the plaintiff is a joint debtor is paid its debt by one. Entirely or in part by his or her discretion, but will select But the debtor continued to be bound in every person until the debt is paid entirely completed and the Commercial Code, Section 291 on the second defendant had not paid the debt under the Supreme Court said a defendant is still liable to pay. Judgement of the plaintiff until the debt is paid back to finish The plaintiff then sued the debt that the two defendants to be bankrupt.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 386/2550.
2 The plaintiff sued the defendant as the defendant violated an employer as a defendant in two of the employer violated the employment. And the three defendants jointly liable as a recipient Prauanpaicgmhun indemnity liability of the defendant and the defendant a 2, 3, is different. For the defendants 1 and 2, the age of 1 year from the date the victim knew of the infringement and should be aware of the need for compensation under feeder Commercial Code, Section 448, paragraph one of the defendants 3 and 2 years old. from the date of casualty, according to Article 882, paragraph one, when age, sued the defendant, one of two defendants to three can be separated from each other under section 295 given age as you or a penalty only to debtors who are accused of 3 does. Age may not be raised under Section 448, paragraph one of the battle.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 8215/2549.
Guarantee agreement states that if the defendant first fails to pay tax on the plaintiff informed of the tax that the defendant, one must pay to the defendant to two known defendants 2 to be paid to the plaintiff within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notification. Without calling for a defendant to pay before an agreement is a case of two defendants who are taking the guaranteed right to request that a defendant who is a debtor to pay first. Kathy and taking the ultimate display to force the plaintiff to pay debts out of assets of a defendant before the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 688 and 689 which causes the plaintiff to the defendant claims that one or the second one. debt entirely by the defendant, 1 and 2, shall remain liable to the plaintiff until the plaintiff will be paid back completely finished second defendant is liable to a defendant as joint debtors under Section 691 Commercial Code.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6315/2549.
Civil and Commercial Code, Section 457 applies to the parties in the contracts. This is a matter between the buyer and the seller only The registration fee right of redemption to be paid by Por land is state money collected from farmers as compensation by the State to serve the people who Por land subject to section 104 the applicant is free of charge. Which debt incurred by the law and look at the share of debt is not paid. Without regard to whether the applicant during the registration of rights and juristic act with Parties agree that any party is to pay, so the plaintiff shall be entitled to a buyer or seller to one or two payments. The lack of tradition in all.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 3932/2549.
The plaintiff sued the defendant, a hire-purchase agreement guarantees defendants the two defendants claimed that the second counterclaim defendant a lease payment is complete. When a defendant is dead. Plaintiff's name to be registered heirs of a defendant who owned the car hire. The claim that the plaintiff argues that a defendant's right to argue for the rights of the defendant Yes 2 No 2 No authority counterclaim defendant. The second defendant's counterclaim is not related to the original indictment. Not included with the original indictment. And the guarantee agreement states that the second defendant is liable with the defendant at a joint debtors that Affects only that the plaintiff is entitled to a payment from a defendant or the defendant, one of two entirely under Commercial Code Section 291 and the second defendant could not exercise as stated in the last year. . CCC Section 688, 689 and 690 only to find that the second defendant's right to prosecute a defendant with no replacement.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 5035/2549.
The plaintiff and the defendant, 2 and 3 are a guarantee of a defendant to the District Finance Corporation will not even guarantee the same. The plaintiff and the defendant, 2 and 3, it is liable to a debtor corporation capital district with Commercial Code, Section 682, paragraph two, when the plaintiff corporation debt to finance a district representative to the defendant and the plaintiff 4,838,567.40 Baht. subrogation of the Corporation would fund district took recourse to the defendant, 2 and 3 as equal parts in accordance with Section 229 (3) and Section 296 defendants 2 and 3 are each liable to the plaintiff Baht 1,612,855.80 plus interest. rate of 7.5 percent per year from the date on which the plaintiff paid money to the District Finance Corporation until payment is made.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2765/2548.
The first defendant is the husband accused the two have been signed as a witness in a construction contract in the land of the two defendants. Circumstances where the defendant is not given consent to a binding contract and headed to the plaintiff as a joint debtor, even accused the two parties will sign a contract in the same matter. Housing debts in the defendant both intended to continue to live that would bind the defendant as a plaintiff shall have the power to sue a defendant jointly liable under it.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6107/2548.
Cases before the final, then it The plaintiff sued the defendant for the enforcement of this case, the third defendant in the lawsuit jointly liable with the company before Rama, the first defendant to other defendants in the case before. In this case the defendant as a guarantor of mortgage and land title deed No. 60775 with the building. A debt security of a defendant in the case before the District Court and cases before the Court to the defendant and the defendant, a case with the other defendants in the case before sharing payments to the plaintiff. If you do not pay the mortgage, confiscation of land and mortgage the land of the other defendants. Auction payment to the plaintiff. If payment is not enough money to seize other assets of three defendants in the case before payment in full.
The plaintiff filed this lawsuit to force the mortgage for the land title deed No. 12981 with the building where the defendant is insured mortgage securities increased to the plaintiff. The force is requested that if the defendant did not redeem the mortgage debt in the case before the Court. Asked to enforce the mortgage debt in the case of land to the plaintiff in the case before the Court. If the auction does not have enough money to pay debts. Have a defendant to seize other assets of the auction proceeds to debt repayment to the plaintiff until the end.
Are on land that the plaintiff sued the defendant for the enforcement of mortgage in the case before the case is different converts well. Although the defendant is mortgaged as collateral for a debt that companies must pay to Rama by the same plaintiff. But when the claim is based on the principle of a lawsuit alleging the plaintiff's request to force the defendant. Liability case with previous cases, issues will be different diagnosis that is This case is the issue in dispute. Defendant over land title deed No. 12981 with buildings insurance company debt Thi offense shall be liable in the case before, and the plaintiff had not paid back or not. The case before the issue by the plaintiff's complaint that Title deed and mortgage guarantees defendants No. 60775 with the building. Debt insurance company must pay to Rama plaintiff and the defendant may be sued with other defendants in the case before the liability. Payment to the plaintiff or not. If it is not about removing the singer sued the same parties in relation to each other. Diagnosis ago By the same grounds, which will be filed with the style as unique as P.wi.po. Section 148 plaintiffs filed this case it is not unique to cases filed before the final.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6040/2545.
The contract is significant that this contract is made between the defendant, which further in Agreement called the "Employer" party and the defendant together, and the plaintiff, which both companies hereinafter referred to as "the Contractor" the other party to the text of the agreement requires the plaintiff and the defendant together with as a common "contract". Because the work to be done to the building construction that will not cause segregation. How any new building. Much. And the defendant to pay the wages it paid in the period. Does not require that the plaintiff and the defendant will settle with each other by how much. Continue to pay together. Even in the first payment to be divided equally for each period. It is solely for the convenience of the plaintiff and the defendant together only to find it refreshing change. As a convert impossible. The plaintiff and the defendant continued to have as a creditor with the debt paid. The defendant shall be entitled to payment to the plaintiff or the defendant with any creditor who is. Time as it is selected by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 298.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6829/2543.
Although Ms. Barni with the defendant. And other guarantees will jointly guarantee the debt reduction agreement to sell its paper bag check with Thai and the plaintiff will receive payment from Mrs Supannee some Even forgiven by the plaintiff withdrew the civil lawsuit Ms. Barni such. The plaintiff has the debt under the Supreme Court Case No. 23817/2532 red sentenced under the permit By Ms. Barni not become a debtor under the Supreme Court with To sue the defendant to a bankruptcy case. Ms. Barni with the debtor is not a defendant in the lawsuit the plaintiff's debt. Although the plaintiff to be forgiven Ms. Barni, it is not the case for the plaintiff forgiven. Accounts with the defendant under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 340 and Section 293.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2709/2543.
If creditors are several debtors. Debtors, creditors will sue and be sued, any how. Is indeed the rights of creditors to choose the action. The plaintiff, a creditor has the right to sue other receivables are not required by the bankruptcy filing by the defendant. Both the plaintiff did not sue the defendant in the bankruptcy case. The defendant is indeed the one that you will not have to become bankrupt. And even though the debtor later people will become bankrupt matter. Defendants have not free from liability to plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the defendant has the right to be the case. Without regard to whether the defendant must request a settlement in bankruptcy or not. And will lose the right to recourse or not. Because of the recourse is the debtor themselves. Case holding that the plaintiff is not entitled to sue the defendant in bad faith.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 2013/2542.
Because automobile collision caused by the negligence of the defendant and the defendant, a 6 by both parties. Although both sides would not have intentionally or willfully violated the plaintiff's share even. But when damage to the plaintiff, a third party defendant must be considered one and the six defendants have all contributed to cause such damage all together. And the same damage. Each person who violates a joint liability for any damage incurred by Commercial Code, Section 301, Section 291 of the fifth defendant, a recipient Prauanpaicgmhun. Be jointly liable in damages to the plaintiff and the defendant with others as joint debtors.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 8533/2542.
A defendant must be liable for damages in violation of the information age of 1 year from the date of the injured student to abuse and should know who will be using the product. Silk replacement under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 448, paragraph one of the two defendants must be liable for damages under insurance contracts. The age of 2 years from the date of casualty, according to Section 882 paragraph one shows that the age of two defendants sued can be separated from each other as well as civil. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 295 states that as you age or as a penalty only to debtors who are thereupon Prosecution of the defendants liable for a data breach is the first year would expire, as you only to the defendant that a lawsuit is unrelated to the two defendants of liability insurance under the age of 2 years from the date of casualty.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 625/2542.
When the plaintiff and the guarantee Sat share of L in the amount of 1,000,000 baht and liabilities of the plaintiff. S. limited times would limit the interest rate with the Corporation plc. Be liable to the defendant. But not exceeding the rate at which the defendant has the right to think according to the law of the repayment agreement Sat guarantee the defendant and the defendant forgiven for 1,800,000 baht on Sat April 18, 2533 the plaintiff as a debtor with a benefit with the Sat. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 292, paragraph one, 293, even 11 years later, another 2 months and 23 days, the plaintiff sued the defendant is insolvent. But the limit on the plaintiff to the defendant was liable for only a limited guarantee of one million U.S. contract with both. Sat any payment to the defendant under a guarantee agreement to 1,800,000 baht, and even then the plaintiff will be liable under the mortgage insurance companies l debt of more interest in the amount of 200,000 baht with any outstanding liability to the plaintiff to the defendant when including principal and interest then there is no way up. 15,332,017.82 baht and the accused Lecture sued in bankruptcy cases that the plaintiff is also liable to the defendant with the Corporation plc. More 15,015,517.82 U.S. by describing the amount the plaintiff is liable under a guarantee agreement and that. Attorney of the accused to be testimony in the class. Another consideration that must be jointly liable to the plaintiff company sued the money until l 15,332,071.82 U.S. District Court receivership until the final plaintiff, and sentenced to bankrupt the plaintiff. Damage perpetrated by negligence in calculating the outstanding amount of the plaintiff. And an exercise in bad faith.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6251/2541.
Loan contracts specify the amount of the plaintiff to recover, and the other lenders to the defendant, a different number in the amount not equal to, respectively. The plaintiff and the other lenders participating in the debt separately. Creditors can not be shared. The contract did not require that the prosecution plaintiff must obtain the consent or see Like from a lender before you lose with the prosecution. In accordance with the provisions of the law, creditors did not indicate that many lenders anyone. One must have the consent or approval from a lender other people before you bring a lawsuit, so the plaintiff has the power to prosecute this without the consent of the Lenders party before the defendant four to. with interest that the defendant. Receive a loan under the program loan is not due lack of working capital assumed. The plaintiff is a breach of contract. The defendant shall not be liable in excess interest rate of 13.5 percent year on Appeals and the defendant. Similarly, this fourth appeal, which was diagnosed Sreouthrnntprc 3. Article four defendants appeal that the four defendants are not liable for interest rate up to 13.5 percent per year, all four defendants did not raise the admonition in the Court of First Instance and the like. So do not get diagnosed for a petition that accused the four interest rate higher than the plaintiff should be the plaintiff. Size analysis of investment mistakes. The four defendants made hundreds of million of debt and the plaintiff did not appear to be. Special damage is such a thing. The four are accused. Not be liable for more than 13.5 percent per year, is an at Has not been raised by the parties and the like in the first instance Sreouthrnntprc third issue is also not a problem with public order to the Supreme Court has not been diagnosed.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 4712/2539.
Because the collision caused by the negligence of the defendant and the deceased as an employee The two defendants, no less than the same even though the defendant and the deceased is a difference of them. Any negligence, but due to the negligence of the defendant and a deceased No less than those above, then a defendant must be jointly liable for the defendant to 2 to Full compensation of the plaintiff as joint debtors.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 5709/2537.
Code of Civil Procedure Section 271 states that creditors must be requested under the Supreme Court to force the case to the debtor under the Supreme Court within ten years. From the date of the Court and to request enforcement. The plaintiff, a creditor under the Supreme Court would have taken a lawsuit to force steps complete within that time period is. Meant to ask the Court of First Instance issued before execution. The next step must inform the court that issued Enforcement Officer execution means then. To discuss the request to seize the property of Enforcement Officer judgment debtor if the debtor to indicate that many people want to seize any assets of the debtor. The plaintiff requested the defendant to the execution means, both within ten years from the date of the sentence. But retaining the exclusive property of the defendant at an auction and not enough money to pay debts. Although the plaintiff has not taken enforcement to the property of the defendant but the plaintiff stated that 2 per Enforcement Officer paying the defendant's request to seize the land. 2, within 10 years from the date of the sentence. But because the land is outside the civil court Enforcement Officer of First Instance has issued a letter asking the Court of First Instance, the Court Sikhio the land is located allows execution instead. The Court of Enforcement Officer Sikhio to seize the land when it Is the process of operation of the Enforcement Officer. Although the Court Enforcement Officer Sikhio to seize the land of the two defendants over the ten years from the date of the sentence. When the plaintiff, a creditor under the Supreme Court to perform their duty is complete within ten years from the date the sentence is considered that the plaintiff has requested the execution under the Supreme Court within ten years from the date of the sentence under the Code of Civil Procedure section 271, then the plaintiff is entitled to the enforcement of land out of the second defendant was.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 1120/2535.
The four plaintiffs sued the two defendants jointly liable for the data breach occurred at the same time. The four plaintiffs would have shared interest in the value of the case. Prosecution is shared by the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 59, even though debt is caused by the defendant violated a loss, but at the same time that the two defendants would be liable to each plaintiff. Would be violated depending on the results of the individual plaintiffs received from the data breach in respect of damages The plaintiff was not a creditor the two defendants together. Therefore, the plaintiff must clearly describe the action that each plaintiff is entitled to the damages from two defendants that plaintiff's description of how to sue the two defendants liable together Compensate the plaintiff. Considered to be a force not clearly describe the request of the plaintiff's complaint is ambiguous.
Judgement of the Supreme Court 11161/2511.
Of the Code of Civil Procedure Section 290, paragraph two of that. Do not allow the court to request an average property. Unless the court that the applicant can not take payments from other assets. Judgement debtor under the terms of the judgment debtor means debtors in this Court by the property seized in this case. If no other property. The applicant also asked the average amount the property sold. Find imply judgment debtor in another case that the applicant does not mean winning the case (refer the petition 176/2494).
Judgement of the Supreme Court 6251/2541.
Contract Loan No. disputed that the plaintiff brought action to specify a limit to recovery of the plaintiff and the lender other support to the defendant, one on each of the limit are not equal and the order of the plaintiff and the lender more involved in debt. the separate Creditors can not be shared. The contract did not require that the prosecution plaintiff must have been. Consent or approval from a lender with bad before you can prosecute. In accordance with the provisions of the law, creditors are not many of them stating that the lender one must be. Consent or approval from a lender before filing another lawsuit, so the plaintiff has the power to prosecute without this. Consent from other lenders before
