Page 20 - ดุลพาห เล่ม3.indd

ดุลพาห

civil and commercial matters as well as to ensure rapid and simple recognition and
enforcement of judgments made in an EU member state . The Brussels I (recast)
26
determines the courts of which member state may assert jurisdiction to decide on
a civil and commercial dispute where there is a foreign element. By unifying

jurisdictional rules and restricting grounds on international jurisdiction, the Brussels
I (recast) aims to enhance legal certainty and predictability as well as protect

defendants from exorbitant jurisdiction . The Brussels I (recast) provides detailed rules
27
on international jurisdiction suitable for each category of transactions or activities,

such as general jurisdiction based on the defendant’s domicile (Article 4), special
jurisdiction (Article 7), jurisdiction in matters related to insurance (Articles 10-11),

jurisdiction over consumer contracts (Articles 17-19), and exclusive jurisdiction
(Article 24). This regulation has been used extensively as a reference for developing

proposals to reform the rules on international jurisdiction in many countries such as
Japan and Korea .
28
29
2. General Jurisdiction

(1) The current state of Thai law

General jurisdiction permits a court to hear any claims against a defendant.
General jurisdiction of Thai courts over a defendant follows the traditional principle

of “actor sequitur forum rei.” The domicile of the defendant is used as a basic
connecting factor for establishing general jurisdiction. The CPC provides three

alternative bases for determination of the defendant’s domicile. Firstly, Section 4

26. Recital 4 of the Preamble to the Brussels I (recast).
27. Trevor C. Hartley, International Commercial Litigation: Text, Cases and Materials on Private International
Law. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015, 22.
28. See Kokusai Saiban Kankatsu Kenkyu-Kai [Working Group on International Judicial Jurisdiction],
“Kokusai saiban kankatsu kenkyu-kai hokoku-sho (1)” [Report of Working Group on International
Judicial Jurisdiction (1)], NBL, no. 883 (2008): 38.
29. See Kwang, “Proposed Amendments of the Private International Law Act,” 3.

กันยายน - ธันวาคม ๒๕๖๑ 9