Page 53 - ดุลพาห เล่ม3.indd

ดุลพาห

before a court and confirms parties’ consent as to the place where the dispute with a
foreign element should be settled . Therefore, the CPC should be revised to recognize
120
the appearance of the defendant as a new ground of international jurisdiction with the
condition that the defendant proceeds on the merits without contesting jurisdiction.

(7) Coordination of international parallel proceedings

With a rapidly increasing number of international litigation cases worldwide,

parallel litigation has become a recurrent issue in transnational disputes. It is likely that
litigation based on the same cause of action by the same parties will simultaneously

arise in multiple states. The lack of coordination among courts in different states may
result in wasted judicial resources, excessive burdens and expenses on the litigants,

and conflicting judgments. Coordination between the courts is necessary to tackle this
problem. However, since there is little chance of adopting a multilateral convention

regarding parallel litigation at present, even at the ASEAN level, the Thai legislature
should make the decision to authorize its courts to dismiss or stay international parallel

proceedings under certain conditions. If there is a proceeding pending in another
forum abroad that is based on the same cause of action by the same parties and is

commenced before the proceedings in a Thai court, this should be a strong indicative
factor in favor of staying or dismissing local proceedings unless the Thai court has

exclusive jurisdiction or it is manifest that a Thai court is a more appropriate forum
to resolve the dispute.

V. Conclusion

This article has highlighted some important features of the Thai jurisdictional

principles through comparative analysis. The examination above indicates that the
existing jurisdictional rules suffer from many defects, which appear to be the result

of the lack of a general concept for international jurisdiction and discrepancies with

120. Jurcys, “Jurisdiction in Intellectual Property Disputes,” 199.
ê

42 เล่มที่ ๓ ปีที่ ๖๕