Problems of Claiming Compensation for Damages for Tort Liability of Officials Under the Tort Liability of Officials Act B.E. 2539 and the Civil and Commercial Code

Abstract

Background and Aims: The Civil and Commercial Code has defined the right to claim, including the right to recourse, in Sections 193/9 to 193/13, the statute of limitations for recourse in Sections 193/30 to 193/34, and the right to claim in Sections 233 to 236. The Civil and Commercial Code has clearly defined the statute of limitations for recourse. When considering this, it can be seen that the Act on Tort Liability of Officials B.E. 2539, Section 9, has not yet clearly defined the period for recourse. Therefore, the objective is to study the background and significance of the problems related to the principles of tort liability to compare the use of the right to claim or the right to recourse for the other party to pay compensation within the specified period in the Civil and Commercial Code.

Methodology: This research is a qualitative research by searching textbooks, books, research works, theses, articles, related laws, decisions of judicial organizations and the Council of State, as well as official letters and documents published by various agencies related to the Act on Tort Liability of Officials B.E. 2539, focusing on issues concerning the exercise of rights to claim or the exercise of rights to recourse by government agencies to compare the differences between the Act on Tort Liability of Officials B.E. 2539, Section 9, and the Civil and Commercial Code, which stipulates the rights to claim or the rights to recourse in Sections 193/9 to 193/13, the statute of limitations for recourse in Sections 193/30 to 193/34, and the rights to claim in Sections 233 to 236.

Result: This research found that the Civil and Commercial Code has defined the right to claim in Sections 193/9 to 193/13, the statute of limitations for recourse in Sections 193/30 to 193/34, and the right to claim in Sections 233 to 236, in which the creditor has the right to demand that the debtor perform the debt within the specified period. As for the Tort Liability of Officials Act B.E. 2539, there is no clear statute of limitations for exercising the right to claim or recourse. If the Tort Liability of Officials Act B.E. 2539 is amended by specifying the statute of limitations for exercising the right to claim or recourse for government agencies to demand that the tortious official pay compensation within one year from the date the government agency or official paid compensation to the injured party or the statute of limitations expires after one year from the date the injured party knew about the tort and knew who was liable to pay compensation or after ten years from the date the official committed the tort.

Conclusion: The solution to the problem of exercising the right to claim or recourse under the Tort Liability of Officials Act B.E. 2539 (1996) has not yet specified the right to claim or recourse for government agencies to demand that the tortious official pay compensation to the government agency since the time of the claim to the injured party, which is different from the Civil and Commercial Code, which specifies the right to claim or recourse in Sections 193/9 to 193/13, the statute of limitations for recourse in Sections 193/30 to 193/34, and the right to claim in Sections 233 to 236. If the Tort Liability of Officials Act B.E. 2539 (1996) is amended by specifying the right to claim or recourse to be time-limited after one year from the date the injured party knew about the tort and knew who was liable to pay compensation, or after ten years from the date the tort was committed, if the injured party or government agency does not exercise the right to claim within the specified period, it will be considered time-limited.