Lease Transfer Dispute: Agent Status and Contract Validity
Order 4: Mr. Yod and Ms. Ying were married and registered, with Ms. Ying being the sole tenant of a residence located at Wat Yang, cohabitating for three years after the contract was executed, six months later. Mr. Yod had a concubine who did not return home, Ms. Ying granted consent and executed a contract designating Mr. Yong as the tenant instead, and Ms. Ying relocated to another location. Subsequently, Mr. Yong became aware of this and terminated the transfer of rights to Mr. Yong. However, Mr. Yong and Wat Yang disregarded this, and Mr. Yod filed a lawsuit against Mr. Yong for the invalidation of the contract as the tenant, Mr. Yong, lacked the authority to transfer the lease rights. The defendants, Ms. Ying, Mr. Yong, and Wat Yang, jointly acted improperly, failing to execute a valid transfer, which the plaintiff had waived and requested the court to enforce the transfer of the lease rights to Ms. Ying, the original defendant. If the defendants failed to comply, the defendants jointly shall pay damages equivalent to the compensation that should have been received for the lease of the building to a third party in the capacity of the lease rights being a shared asset between the plaintiff and Ms. Ying, amounting to 10,000 baht.
If you were the court, the court would rule to dismiss the plaintiff’s claim because Ms. Ying, the defendant, did not have the status of an agent for the plaintiff due to the lack of a written document, according to Section 53 of the Civil and Commercial Code, “Lease.” This is a violation of the rights of Wat Yang, the defendant, who had a lease agreement; the transfer of the lease was used to exercise rights according to law, not an illegal act. Therefore, the plaintiff could not claim damages as per Section 935/2508.
Mr. Somsak has prosecuted a case in the Samut Prakan Provincial Court.