DEVELOPMENT OF APPLYING PUNITIVE DAMAGES CONCEPT IN THAI LAWS
Main Article Content
Abstract
Even though the Punitive Damages Concept is based upon the Common Law, the said Concept is currently widespread and acceptable among the countries using the Civil Law more than ever. In this respect, this may be due to the fact that the concepts of civil damages determination in the Civil Law have been more integratedly developed and changed. Thailand is regarded as a country using the Civil Law and applying the Punitive Damages Concept in Thai laws to enhance the efficiency in governing the laws, as well as using them as a legal measure in creating fairness for society. Application of the aforesaid Concept for Thai laws has originated from the time at which the Trade Secret Act, B.E.2545 (2002) has been promulgated and the application mentioned above do not cease only to the Trade Secret Act, B.E.2545 (2002). There are still development and application for several additional specific laws or called “technical laws” in more than past decades. The Writer aspires that on certain days in the future the Punitive Damages Concept is also likely to apply to the Civil and Commercial Code on Wrongful Act, which is primary legislation, which shall expand the frame of remedy and create more fairness for the damaged parties, as well as develop the laws on wrongful act up to another level which is expedient to protect the society.
Article Details
References
Elliot Klayman and Seth Klayman, “Punitive Damages: Toward Torah-based Tort Reform,” Cardozo Law Review 23, 1 (June 2001): 221-225.
Herbert L. Packer, The Limits of the Criminal Sanction (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1968), p. 35.
Mark Peterson, Syam Sarma, and Michael Shanley, Punitive Damages: Empirical Findings (Santa Monica, Calif.: The Rand Corporation, 1987), p. 2.
Melvin M. Belli, “Punitive Damages: Their History, Their Use and Their Worth in Present-day Society,” U.M.K.C Review 2 (October 1980): 49; A concise review of the topic is found in Klayman and Klayman, op. cit., p. 225.
Susan M. Peter, “Punitive Damages in Oregon,” Willamttel L. Review 18 (May 1982): 369, 372; A concise review of the topic is found in Klayman and Klayman, op. cit., p. 225.
คดี Wilkes v. Wood, (1763) 98 Eng. Rep. 489.
คดี Huckle v. Money, (1763) 95 Eng. Rep. 768.
พระราชบัญญัติความลับทางการค้า พ.ศ. 2545 มาตรา 13