Bangkok Legal Service

Mr. Net executed a loan agreement with the Savings Cooperative of the Ministry of , with Mr. Ngern and Mr. Thong acting as guarantors. Upon the due date for repayment, Mr. Net defaulted on a sum of 500,000 baht. The Office of the Attorney General then demanded that Mr. Ngern pay the debt on behalf of the Savings Cooperative. Mr. Ngern failed to repay the debt. The Savings Cooperative subsequently received 620,000 baht in full satisfaction of Mr. Net’s debt. Mr. Ngern then exercised his rights as a guarantor jointly with Mr. Thong to hold Mr. Net liable for one-half of the debt, amounting to 310,000 baht. Mr. Net and Mr. Thong were obligated to repay the debt to Mr. Net. Mr. Ngern and Mr. Thong were joint guarantors of Mr. Net’s debt, therefore, they are considered as a single debtor under the Civil and Commercial Code. Upon Mr. Ngern’s payment of the debt in satisfaction to Mr. Net, Mr. Ngern acquires the right to pursue legal action against one-half of the debt, as stipulated in Section 682, Paragraph 2 of the Civil and Commercial Code, and Section 229 (3) and Section 296 of the same Code, and has the right to pursue legal action against Mr. Net to fully satisfy the debt, as stipulated in Section 693, Paragraph 1 of the Civil and Commercial Code. Subsequently, Mr. Ngern and Mr. Net agreed to execute a new loan agreement for a sum of 620,000 baht. This circumstance constitutes the creation of a new debt, resulting in a material change that extinguishes the right of legal action previously held. Therefore, the debt is transformed into a new debt, resulting in the cessation of the right of legal action, as stipulated in Section of the Civil and Commercial Code. Mr. Ngern is entitled to file a claim for the full value of the new debt under Section 349 of the Civil and Commercial Code. The liability of Mr. Thong as a guarantor of the original debt of Mr. Net and as a guarantor jointly with Mr. Ngern is extinguished, and Mr. Ngern has no right to pursue legal action against Mr. Thong. (Judgement of the Court of Appeal No. 4574/2536).

Mr. took his vehicle to Mr. Heng’s auto repair shop for repair.