You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

June 27, 2014

Dilemma: File a Claim or Nix the Contract?

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Having multiple legal options is generally viewed as positive in a business context. It may, however, also imply the need to make a difficult decision—one with significant practical and legal consequences. This is particularly so where the transaction is unique, has significant monetary value, or has the potential to affect existing third-party contracts. Real estate transactions fall firmly into this category.

Take a situation in which parties enter into a sale and purchase agreement for real estate. If the seller fails to perform its obligations under the contract, the buyer who is not in breach must decide how best to proceed with the exercise of its legal rights.

These options are provided in Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code (CCC) and have been further clarified by the Supreme Court.

Together, they establish two specific remedies for the buyer: (i) the right to claim specific performance under the contract, e.g., force transfer of ownership as contemplated by the contract; or (ii) the right to terminate the contract and restore the non-breaching party to its pre-contract condition.

The Supreme Court has made clear that these options are mutually exclusive, so a non-breaching party must clearly adopt one or the other. This is because one option legally terminates the contract, while the other maintains the breaching party’s obligation to perform under the contract—positions that are in legal contradiction.

Deciding on a specific remedy to address the seller’s breach thus requires careful consideration of the benefits and potential disadvantages of each option. In this article, we elaborate on issues the buyer should consider before exercising the right to claim specific performance or terminate the contract entirely.

Claim for Specific Performance

According to Section 213 of the CCC, when one party fails to perform its obligations under a contract, the other is entitled to enforce the contract by filing a civil claim against the defaulting party asking the court for compulsory performance.

Under Section 213, if the obligation is to carry out a juristic act such as transferring ownership of property, the court is empowered to order specific performance on the basis that such performance is consistent with the seller’s declaration of intent at the time of contracting.

In addition to obtaining specific performance, a non-breaching buyer has the right to claim compensation for any damages incurred from the seller’s failure to perform the contractual obligation. This may include contractually stipulated penalties for non-performance.

Terminate the Contract

According to Section 391 of the CCC, when a seller does not fulfill its contractual obligations, the buyer has the right to rescind the contract entirely, and each party is thereafter bound to restore the other to its pre-contract condition.

To terminate the contract, the buyer must express its intent to terminate, typically by sending a termination notice to the seller. Such expression of intent cannot be withdrawn.

The buyer also has the right to claim compensation for damages incurred from the seller’s failure to perform its obligation.

For example, if the seller fails to transfer land ownership and the buyer chooses to terminate the contract, the buyer can claim for both the price paid and for damages. After the contract is terminated, the buyer cannot claim for specific performance.

After the contract is terminated, parties then have the obligation to restore each other to their pre-contract condition. A non-defaulting party may refuse to restore the defaulting party to its pre-contract condition, however, if the latter fails to restore the former to its pre-contract condition.

Consider the case of a buyer who has placed an initial deposit for land and is permitted by the seller to possess the land before transfer of ownership.

If the seller fails to transfer ownership within the prescribed period and the buyer terminates the contract due to such breach, then the seller is required to return the deposit. If the seller refuses, however, the buyer can possess the land until the deposit is returned.

Conclusion

Prior to deciding how to proceed with a claim for specific performance or contract termination, a buyer should carefully assess its objectives in entering the contract and the seller’s ability to perform if at all possible including conducting financial due diligence. The conduct of adequate due diligence can significantly reduce the risk of breach and can avoid the cost and time required to litigate a dispute.

If avoiding a dispute is unavoidable, however, negotiation and settlement efforts should be seriously considered, as they may lead to a solution that is preferable to protracted litigation. In some cases where litigation is an unavoidable last resort, understanding the best option available to a non-breaching party can help to maximize the benefits from the dispute resolution process.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Real Estate

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 26, 2025
Thailand ratified the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards on December 21, 1959, with the Convention coming into force on March 20, 1960. This ratification was a significant step in aligning Thailand’s arbitration framework with international standards, facilitating the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the country. In Thailand, the enforcement of both domestic and international arbitral awards is governed by the Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002), which is based on the first version of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985 (as opposed to the latest version from 2006). However, unlike Australia, Hong Kong, and Singapore, Thailand is not an UNCITRAL Model Law country. While Thailand’s Arbitration Act is influenced by the UNCITRAL Model Law, it incorporates certain local contexts that require interpretation alongside Thai court rulings. The Arbitration Act also confirms the authority of arbitral tribunals to grant interim measures, reinforcing tribunals’ power in managing disputes effectively. Additionally, the act incorporates principles from the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958). This article explores the key procedural steps, timeframes, and practical challenges associated with the enforcement of arbitral awards under Thailand’s legal framework. Procedures for Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Thailand The enforcement of arbitral awards in Thailand follows the procedures outlined in the Arbitration Act: Application to the competent court: Under the Arbitration Act, parties seeking enforcement must submit a petition to the Thai courts within three years of the award having become enforceable. The application must include the original or certified copies of the arbitral award and the arbitration agreement, along with translations if necessary. In Thailand, the choice of court for filing the arbitral award depends on the nature of the disputed contract. If the contract concerns
Read More
February 21, 2025
As Vietnam continues its government restructuring, including the merging of several key ministries, the country is signaling that mergers of provinces could be next. Conclusion 126-KL/TW of the Politburo and Secretariat, issued on February 14, 2025, sets out several tasks for continuing to streamline the political system in 2025, notably including, among others, the following: Elimination of intermediate administrative levels, and mergers of provincial units: The Government Party Committee is tasked with researching and planning for the elimination of intermediate administrative levels (district levels); reorganizing the commune level with structures, functions, duties, powers, and responsibilities aligned with the new organizational model; and proposing the merging of some provincial administrative units. A report to the Politburo is required by Q3 2025. Reorganization of police structure: The Central Public Security Party Committee is tasked with leading and coordinating the implementation of a three-tier police organization, eliminating the district-level police. Judicial system reforms: The Central Party Committees of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuracy are tasked with researching and advising on the organizational model for courts and procuracies, and proposing amendments and supplements to relevant party mechanisms and state laws, with the aim of eliminating the district level. A report to the Politburo is required by Q2 2025. Implications of Merging Provinces The merging of provinces could bring positive impacts as well as new challenges. The expected benefits include: Administrative efficiency and cost saving: Reducing the number of administrative units could lead to more efficient governance and decision-making processes, as well as lower administrative costs due to fewer government offices and personnel. Economic development: Larger administrative areas can benefit from better allocation of resources and infrastructure development. Larger provinces may also attract more investment due to increased economic potential and market size. Improved service delivery: Public services could improve
Read More
January 21, 2025
A proposal to establish a specialized Intellectual Property Court in Vietnam has been a topic of significant interest among IP practitioners for the past 20 years. It was thus a major breakthrough when the new Law on the Organization of People’s Courts was ratified in 2024, stipulating in Article 4.1(dd) that the Vietnamese court system would include a specialized first-instance IP Court. The new law took effect on January 1, 2025, replacing the Law on the Organization of People’s Courts of 2014, A groundbreaking law This breakthrough can be viewed from multiple perspectives. First of all, in terms of organization, this is the first time, after numerous considerations, that Vietnam has officially recognized the importance of the IP field and the need to establish a specialized adjudicative body due to the field’s unique nature. The establishment of a specialized first-instance IP Court is expected to lead to fundamental changes in the practice of developing and applying IP law. While the establishment of IP rights such as trademarks, patents, and plant varieties is managed by administrative agencies such as the Intellectual Property Office, the Copyright Office, and the Crop Production Department, which seem unlikely to change their functions and tasks, there could be significant changes in the enforcement of these rights, which has been a persistent issue in Vietnam’s IP law system. Thus far, in practice, the enforcement of IP rights in Vietnam has relied overwhelmingly on administrative measures over civil measures. Civil measures, typically involving court proceedings under which the matter will be submitted to a court for settlement, are not appealing to disputing parties, especially IP rights owners. The absence of a specialized court has led to many IP cases being handled by judges without any knowledge or experience in this specialized field, resulting in confusion, misconceptions about
Read More
January 16, 2025
On January 13, 2025, Thailand’s cabinet approved in principle the draft Entertainment Complex Act, as proposed by the Ministry of Finance. This landmark legislative proposal, which would allow casinos as part of larger “entertainment complexes,” will now proceed through further parliamentary review and approval. Key provisions of the draft act are described below. Corporate structure: Entertainment complexes must be operated by Thai-registered limited companies or public limited companies with a minimum paid-up capital of THB 10 billion. Directors of the licensed entity must be individuals and have the qualifications and none of the prohibited characteristics specified in the draft act. The draft act does not impose restrictions on foreign-majority ownership structures; however, it is worth monitoring whether any amendments addressing this matter are introduced during the legislative process. Operating conditions: Each entertainment complex must be located in an area designated under a royal decree. It must also include at least four types of entertainment businesses listed in the annex to the draft act (e.g., shopping mall, hotel, sports stadium, amusement park), along with a casino. The allocation of casino space must comply with regulations to be specified at a later date. Licensing conditions: Licenses will be valid for 30 years, renewable in increments of up to 10 years. The license issuance fee is THB 5 billion, the annual fee is THB 1 billion, and the renewal fee is THB 5 billion. The Entertainment Complex Policy Committee, chaired by the prime minister, will review and approve applications. Online gambling restrictions: Licensees are prohibited from offering gambling through internet-connected systems or electronic devices that allow access from outside the casino premises. Labor requirements: Thai and foreign employee ratios must adhere to prescribed regulations. Land privileges: Lease agreements for land use are limited to 50 years. Renewal is permitted for up to
Read More