Problem on Demanding for Lawyer Fee and Lawyer Professional Remuneration

Abstract

The study aims to study about the lawyer remuneration. According to the Civil and Commercial Code and the Lawyer Act B.E. 2528, it is found that when lawyers agree to have the lawyer’s remuneration contract, which is made for partial division from disputed property to be received by the clients according to the court’s judgment or known as contingency fee in conformant with the Freedom of Contract or Autonomy of Will Principle in the Common Law System. There is the problem on creating the standard in permitting the lawyer to remunerate as the court’s decision. It is not considered as the precedent for the lawyer to use it as the practical guidelines that would have caused the remuneration in the case to be the breach of the lawyers’ legal etiquette according to the Lawyer Act B.E. 2528. Even it is not prohibited, the court uses the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 150, to decide on whether or not it is against the peace and order or good moral of the public, and as the interest seeking obtain from the judgment. Furthermore, according to the Ministry of Justice’s regulations on the payment of reward and the expenses to the lawyers provided by the Government for the alleged offender in the criminal cases in 2007 for the investigation, the remuneration is the rate of the reward and payment procedure that are unsuitable for the economy and socialized situation at the present, and making the lawyers lack of motivation to perform their duties and reach their qualifications. The Ministry of Justice’s regulations on paying the commission to the legal consultants in the juvenile and family case of 2017. There designate the commission rate on daily basis, not case by case, the same as other types of rewards. It cause the legal consultants to bear more responsibilities in the lawyer’s comparative ideas and the lack of motivations to perform their duties. Therefore, the lawyer remuneration should be increased in each case.