court case

[sam]

Hi All,

I wondered if anyone has actually taken a court case in Thailand. We look as if we are going to have no choice but to persue this course of action. We have a lawyer and the papers are ready to be served, my questions are does anyone know approximate costs, length of time to reach a conclusion and on the assumption we win can we claim costs?

Many thanks for any info.

[chopsticks]

That would all depend on what type of case it is of course, but the lawyer should be able to give you an indication if you ask, after all, that's what you're paying him for.

[Wanderlust]

I think it is fairly safe to assume that if you win a court case here that you will also be awarded the costs unless there are mitigating circumstances. Whether your opponent in the case has the funds to pay is another matter of course. I have been to court over a civil matter and my lawyer agreed to do the work for actual costs plus a percentage of the win (when paid) but I don't know if that is common practice. Most court systems work fairly slowly due to how many cases they are dealing with, and yours may be complicated if you also need to hire an official translator approved by the court, which would also add to the cost. It also depends on where the case is being heard. As the previous poster says only your lawyer can give you any clear indication of many of these things. If they are prepared to work on a percentage basis it can be a good indicator of how confident they are of winning as well. Good luck with it anyway.

[sam]

Thanks for the answers, we will ask the lawyer, I just thought I would try and get an idea of what to expect.

Thanks again Sam

[Super Joe]

Hi Sam,

Have a look at this guide by one of the larger Bangkok law firms: http://www.tillekeandgibbins.com/public ... system.pdf
They give an overview of the court process, the court fees are minor but they say this about being awarded lawyers costs:
"Judgments may award costs and lawyers’ fees not exceeding 5% of the amount in dispute for the Court of First Instance and not exceeding 3% of the judgment for the Appeals Court or the Supreme Court."

Somewhere on their website I saw this, from 2008, about approx. time-frames:
"The Supreme Court in 2002 instituted a policy of consecutive hearings, barring long adjournments between hearings. Nevertheless, due to the courts’ current backlog, a typical case may still take up to 18 to 24 months, from the date of filing, for judgment to be rendered at the lower level. An appeal in the Court of Appeals usually takes an additional 12-24 months, with a similar period for appeals to the Dika (Supreme) Court."


Good luck,
SJ

[sam]

Thanks SJ.

[T.I.G.R.]

We sued the idiot developer my wife had a contract with two years ago. The contract called for two million to be paid for the land and another amount for the house. After the two million was paid the developer turned into a really weird version of a shrew......she refused to give my wife the Chanote she had promised.

You would think this was a simple claim.....money paid either to be returned or chanote issued. Not so.

Two years later we've spent 50,000 bht of a total 200,00 baht to the lawyer who will represent us and 63,500 bht for court filing fees. We still not have a court date and have been told by the Judge it will be around April of 2010.....nearly three years after the Shrew took our money and thumbed her nose at us.

Defendant has admitted liability, admitted she's not returning the money just because she doesn't feel like it. refused to show up for a settlement conference, refused to allow her attorney to settle on her behalf and we have more than ample "court certified" documentation. We still have to go to court to get a judgment.

My advice would be to do everything you can to minimize your losses, recover what you can and don't make plans for what you lost. Then proceed as planned expecting to spend more money you'll never see again. If you receive a judgment guess how much luck you'll likely have collecting it.

I think that covers your question......Good Luck.

[PeteC]

TIGR, do you at least have possession of the land and perhaps living on it? If not I would simply go and take possession of it by establishing a presence, even if a tin shack, and refuse to leave unless the authorities drag you off. The more media coverage in your case may be a good thing. Pete

[T.I.G.R.]

Good idea Pete, but there was already a nearly finished house on the land.

Frankly we were involved with another of Hua Hin's more infamous developers just before this deal and had completely enough by the time this happened. We took stock of the situation and decided losing some money was worth far more than having to deal with another nut case for any more time than necessary.

As it turned out we were extremely fortunate to find a wonderful place in Cha Am at an equally wonderful price......so financially we wound up on the plus side even if we don't recover what we're still owed. Karma is a wonderful thing.

[Super Joe]

Based on my wife's ongoing court case, about 3 years now, if it's Civil and not serious or a Criminal law case, if someone doesn't want to be had they simply use stalling tactics and fail to turn up at hearings.
My wife's is with half-sister who will not leave wife's house on wife's land. It's 100% clear cut, no two-sides to the story but what happens after initial hearing is a date is set about 4 months time for next hearing, wife's sister just comes out with daft statements like 'its her land' and although judge has copy of land title with wife's name on, he still requests confirmation from village heads and land office that this is case. Next hearing comes along, wife and lawyer travel 6 hours to Buriram court and sister doesn't turn up, judge just sets another hearing for another 4 months time.
Then after land was proved to be wife's the sister says 'its her house, she built and paid for it'. Judge already has wife's receipts and contract with builder but has to have it confirmed, another hearing 4 months later. She doesn't show again, so another date set, no hint of her losing case or being penalised at all for not attending.
Then wife eventually won case but sister appealed, so judgment to vacate is on hold. Sister has to pay court fees to be able to appeal but if no money can get court fees waived. So latest is judge has ordered both sides to investigate her and her husbands employment to see if they have the money themselves or not. It's been stuck on this point of whether she can pay court costs for initial lost case and appeal fees for last 9 months.
Wife's given up chasing solicitor about case and don't want to talk about it anymore to me. Think she's going to settle it by another method, I don't mean anything too serious, which she threatened to do from day one.

Made wrong decision to use cheap (useless) lawyer, as it seemed so clear cut, he laps up the 15k visits to Buriram every 4 months. I'm sure a proper lawyer would have sorted it by now.

SJ

[T.I.G.R.]

One has to wonder whether legal "action" in Thailand is even possible. I think we wasted our money when after two years we've been to Prachaup Kiri Khan a half dozen times with absolutely no movement toward a resolution. The last time the Judge and the two attorneys just sat around for a few minutes, waiting for her not to show up at a court ordered settlement conference. Not one of the three seemed the least bit interested in doing anything to the defendant who has thumbed her nose at the process literally since it began. As Americans know, if you fail to attend a court ordered settlement conference you automatically lose the case, end of story.

We originally filed a complaint with the District Attorney in which at the one hearing we had, she told the D.A., "let them sue me, I love going to court". This after sitting there giving testimony he met with disbelief and further questioning where she buried herself by supporting each and every allegation we had made against her.

That consumer complaint case is still sitting in someones file drawer in Bangkok. We haven't heard a single word about it's disposition after the hearing in November of 2007. My wife's cousin who works in the Prime Minister's office couldn't even get the legal offices there to pull the file for a look to see when there might be a disposition, and she has shown some serious clout on other matters.

Mai Ben Rai.......the Thai national mantra.

[Chas]

In this land of pii-nong, patronage and bribery, it always surprises me to hear that there are courts and judges and even laws. . .these things seem to be hidden away. Police and prisons . .yes. You see them even in movies and on tv.

But what does a Thai judge/courtroom/ trial even look like? Back in the US the legal system is so well known that anyone exposed to any media can describe in detail the way things go in a courtroom. It is a part of the fabric of life there in a way that the Thai system does not seem to be here. (Not arguing that it always works the way it should, or that it is over-used. ..but it is generally respected. Same goes for police. Generally respected in the US (& UK?) . .absolutely despised here. ) Also I dont want to argue here the merits or faults of any system . .just the general visibility.)

I get the impression that Thai lawyers mainly do paperwork and appear in various governmental offices on behalf of clients. . .not in a real courtroom.

I have seen lots of Thai TV (especially soaps with the family) and many Thai movies over the years. Dont remember a single courtroom scene . .and even very few appearances by "police."

And although I never lived in England, I could describe the British legal process, courtroom procedures etc. in some detail.

But here, I dont know where the local courts are located, the levels of justice if there are any, or how the police fit into that picture . .if indeed they do. Are proceedings open to the public? ( I once walked in off the street and watched part of a trial at the Old Bailey.)

Bottom line though, I hope never to have to learn about the Thai justice system though personal experience.

[charlesh]

Christ, a Thai Judge Judy !!!!!! Or a Thai Sotomayor from the hood ha, ha.
Personally no desire to see anything of the insides of a Thai court but have seen some on TV with the usual well publicized cases!

[Super Joe]

But what does a Thai judge/courtroom/ trial even look like? Back in the US the legal system is so well known that anyone exposed to any media can describe in detail the way things go in a courtroom. It is a part of the fabric of life there in a way that the Thai system does not seem to be here.
I get the impression that Thai lawyers mainly do paperwork and appear in various governmental offices on behalf of clients. . .not in a real courtroom

Agree Chas, the info below might go partway to explaining why it is a lengthy process and unfamiliar to us. Cases are often referred to a 'Mediation/Consiliation Centre' (not to be confused with the 'Arbitration process') and is supposed to fast track the system.
But apparently it's function in not to adjudicate over who is right or wrong but to see if an amicable agreement can be reached. However, if one party does not agree to the proposed outcome it simply goes back into the court system. Can see it may work in cases like divorce settlements for who gets what etc, but in many disputes it will just waste time as either party can say 'no thanks'.

Source from Law Forums and Government Courts Department:
Court-Annexed Conciliation/Mediation:
After all claims, counter-claims and answers have been filed the Civil Court can decide to refer the case to the court mediation centre, a separate unit of the civil court with it’s own administration and personnel. Under a recent amendment to the Civil Procedure Code, mediation is compulsory in small claims disputes. The Mediator will not be the court judge, but be a ‘senior judge of the Civil Court or others listed as professional in mediation in the civil court’.

Mediation is commonly used to save court time and reduce costs which are a burden to the tax payer. Mediation is conducted in a relaxed environment, often a conference room and not the court room. Court formalities are dispensed with and secrecy is enforced, public and press are barred from witnessing the conciliation proceedings and a non-disclosure agreement is made. Although the law allows conciliation without attorneys, in practice the conciliator never discourages the presence of an attorney. Decision to exclude attorneys can come from the party itself.

The mediation centre’s role is not to decide who is right or wrong, but explore the possibility of an early settlement without the need to enter into any further court proceedings. If the parties can reach a settlement then a separate judge, can award a judgment based on the agreed terms. If, however, a settlement may not be obtained during this meeting, the parties will enter back into the civil proceedings.

SJ

[sam]

Thank you all for sharing your thoughts and experiences, it has given us a lot to think about.