Main Article Content
This research aims to the law of Volenti non-fit injuria of the history of the Volenti non-fit injuria, and the comparative study of both the law and the court's case law. The study will focus on comparing the guidelines for the implementation and interpretation of Volenti non-fit injuria from the United States to the guidelines for the implementation and interpretation of Volenti non-fit injuria of Thai courts before and after the enactment of the Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2540. And to collect relevant data from reliable sources to analyze the problems discovered.
The study indicated that The deployment of Volenti non-fit injuria in Thailand continues to be a defect. Both the lack of written legislation for Volenti non-fit injuria and the problem of interpreting the law forbidding the Volenti non-fit injuria to defend in the case. Including the problem of overlap of the provisions of Section 9 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2540 to Section 150 of the Civil and Commercial Code. Therefore, this research is proposed to amend and add to the Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2540 because of that. The determination of the rules and restrictions or interdictions on the Volenti non-fit injuria conduct is to ensure fairness to both parties. And reduce the inequalities of individuals in Thailand who have a social bargaining power when there is a different consensus, which is the intent of the Unfair Contract Terms Act B.E. 2540 from the beginning. And to be as clear and concrete as the laws of countries that are universally accepted as United States law.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.