ADVERSE POSSESSION THAI LAW; THEORY OF OWNERSHIP, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
Keywords:
Adverse Possession, Ownership, JusticeAbstract
This article examines the acquisition of ownership through adverse possession under Sections 1382–1385 of the Thai Civil and Commercial Code. It analyzes relevant legal theories and Supreme Court precedents to explain the relationship between the concept of ownership and the principle of social justice. The study is conducted within the framework of property theory, particularly the concepts of absolute ownership and the bundle of rights theory, to assess whether adverse possession should be understood as a deprivation of the original owner’s proprietary rights or as a legal mechanism for reconstituting ownership by operation of law, aimed at ensuring the stability of property rights within the legal system. This research adopts a qualitative legal methodology by examining relevant statutory provisions and judicial decisions of the Supreme Court. The findings indicate that the Court has consistently interpreted the essential elements of adverse possession, particularly the intention to possess as owner (animus domini) and the requirement that possession be peaceful and open in a strict manner to safeguard the ownership rights of the original owner from unjustified interference. At the same time, the Court emphasizes legal certainty and public order, holding that an owner’s failure to exercise or protect their rights within the statutory period may result in a legal transformation of ownership in favor of the possessor who fulfills all prescribed conditions. Accordingly, adverse possession should not be regarded merely as an exception to the sanctity of ownership. Rather, it functions as a structural mechanism within the Thai property law system, balancing the protection of individual proprietary rights with public interests, including legal certainty, economic stability, and social justice. This understanding has significant implications for the continued development and modernization of property law in Thailand within contemporary social and economic contexts.
References
จิตติ ติงศภัทิย์. (2548). คำอธิบายกฎหมายแพ่งลักษณะทรัพย์. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์วิญญูชน.
บรรเจิด สิงคะเนติ. (2562). หลักนิติรัฐและหลักความได้สัดส่วน. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์วิญญูชน.
ประมวลกฎหมายแพ่งและพาณิชย์.
ไพโรจน์ วายุภาพ. (2561). คำอธิบายประมวลกฎหมายแพ่งและพาณิชย์ว่าด้วยทรัพย์. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์วิญญูชน.
วิษณุ เครืองาม. (2554). กฎหมายแพ่งว่าด้วยทรัพย์สิน. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์นิติธรรม.
ศาลฎีกา. (2540). คำพิพากษาศาลฎีกาที่ 6192/2540.
______. (2540). คำพิพากษาศาลฎีกาที่ 8122/2540.
สมยศ เชื้อไทย. (2563). นิติปรัชญาเบื้องต้น. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์วิญญูชน.
สำนักงานศาลยุติธรรม. (2567). รายงานสถิติคดีศาลยุติธรรมประจำปี พ.ศ. 2567. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักงานศาลยุติธรรม.
Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany. (1949). Article 14. Bonn, Germany: Federal Republic of Germany.
French Civil Code. (1804). Article 544. Paris, France: Government of France.
Fuller, L. L. (1964). The Morality of Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Gray, K. & Gray, S. (2009). Elements of Land Law (5th ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Honoré, A. M. (1961). Ownership. In A. G. Guest (Ed.), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence (pp. 107–147). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Penner, J. E. (1997). The Idea of Property in Law. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Raz, J. (1979). The Authority of Law. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Sen, A. (2009). The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Interdisciplinary Innovation Review
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
In order to conform the copyright law, all article authors must sign the consignment agreement to transfer the copyright to the Journal including the finally revised original articles. Besides, the article authors must declare that the articles will be printed in only the Journal of interdisciplinary Innovation Review. If there are pictures, tables or contents that were printed before, the article authors must receive permission from the authors in writing and show the evidence to the editor before the article is printed. If it does not conform to the set criteria, the editor will remove the article from the Journal without any exceptions.
