Default Judgment and Request for Reconsideration of Final Order
Dam had the duty to initiate the presentation of evidence prior to the hearing date. However, on the hearing date, Dam failed to appear in court, and the court ruled that Dam was in default. The court issued an order as requested and ruled that Daeng was the victor in the case. Twenty days later, Dam submitted a request to have the case considered. Dam did not offer an explanation for his absence or oppose the court’s final judgment. On the same day, Dam lodged a new request to have the case considered and objected to the court’s final judgment in detail. As follows, if you were a judge, how would you proceed? It would be appropriate if it was a request for a new hearing within the stipulated time and if it was fully executed. Even if Dam had previously submitted a request, it would not constitute a legal proceeding according to Section 2d8 of the Private and Public Instruments Act. The court must investigate and issue a new order according to Case No. 1319/2494. According to Section 144 of the Private and Public Instruments Act, Mr. See rented a film from Mr. Saeng. Subsequently, Mr. Saeng filed a lawsuit.