Fraudulent Asset Recovery And Concurrent Civil Liability Claims
In the matter of the Prosecution of Mr. Chiao by the Provincial Attorney of Singburi
The Provincial Attorney of Singburi is the Plaintiff in a Criminal Case against Mr. Chiao, concerning fraud, which is an offense occurring in Singburi Province. The Plaintiff sought the return of the sum of from Mr. Chiao.
The proceedings before the court of Mr. Chiao resulted in his release on bail and his subsequent flight to Cambodia. The Cambodian court appointed a guarantor and issued an arrest warrant for Mr. Chiao, and the case was suspended temporarily. Mr. On knew that Mr. Chiao possessed assets that could be subject to execution in Singburi Province.
Subsequently, two years later, Chai Nat desired to file a civil lawsuit against Mr. Chiao for 300,000 baht, alleging fraud, together with accrued interest at a rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of the fraud until full payment was made, in order to enforce a judgment against Mr. Chiao’s assets.
The question is whether Mr. On may sue Mr. Chiao before any court, or whether a specific proceeding is required to execute against Mr. Chiao’s assets to satisfy the debt.
A tort claim arising from a fraud offense is an ancillary civil case related to a criminal case. When the Provincial Attorney files a criminal case and seeks the return of fraudulently obtained assets, the matter is considered to be pending judgment, and the injured party cannot file a separate civil lawsuit regarding the same matter. This constitutes a double filing, and must be pursued in accordance with the Civil Procedure Code, Section 173 (1).
It is considered accrued interest from the principal sum. The filing of a claim for interest is a separate and concurrent claim. Such a filing is prohibited.