LEGAL MEASURES FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE RUNNING OF THE PERIOD OF TIME FOR DISCHARGE FROM BANKRUPTCY UNDER BANKRUPTCY ACT B.E. 2483

Abstract

This thesis is a study on a discharge from bankruptcy by the law and the suspension of the running of the period of time for discharge from bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483. Originally, the Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 laid down the criteria for discharge from bankruptcy only from the court order. Later, the concept of discharge from bankruptcy for the debtor who is a natural person was introduced to the bankruptcy proceedings of Thailand by amendment the Bankruptcy Act (No. 5) B.E. 2542 and the Bankruptcy Act (No. 7) B.E. 2547 section 81/1 to section 81/4. These amendments help the debtor in good faith and cooperate with the official receiver to collect assets. The debtor can settle their debts quickly and get out of bankruptcy. They can manage their businesses and assets again. Moreover, additional provisions on the suspension of the running of the period of time for discharge from bankruptcy in order to punish dishonest debtors for further bankruptcy for a period of time by extending the period of time of discharge from bankruptcy. This is a documentary research and comparison with foreign law i.e. the guideline to draft a bankruptcy law of the United Nations Commission on the Law of International Trade (UNCITRAL), England Australia Singapore and Scotland.

The research found that there was a problem in complying with the provisions of the law. In cases according the law, the official receiver must submit the request to the court so that the court may order the stop to the running of the period of time for discharge. However, this case just appeared to the official receiver that is a close up period with period of time for discharge from bankruptcy. The official receiver cannot submit the application immediately or if the official receiver filed in court as scheduled, the court cannot send a copy of the application to the bankrupt to the appointment of the inquiry before the expiration of the period under section 81/1 paragraph one because section 81/3 prohibited the court to stop the count of time in section 81/1 (1) (2) or (3), or an order after the expiration of the three-year period under section 81/1 paragraph one. As a result, unscrupulous debtor has benefited from the discharge from bankruptcy. It is not different from the debtor in good faith and cooperation with the official receiver to collect assets. This makes it unfair to creditors who apply for a debt repayment in good faith.

The research has suggestion to solve the problem on the suspension of the running of the period of time for discharge from bankruptcy. The petitioner has filed an application to suspend the running of the period of time for discharge from bankruptcy. The court has received the request and ordered the running of the period of time for discharge from bankruptcy under section 81/1 stalled while the court considered the request for the suspension of the running of the period of time for discharge from bankruptcy. When the court found that there was no reason to suspend the running of the period of time for discharge from bankruptcy, it gives the order that the period of time for discharge from bankruptcy stumbles, it is retracted in itself. Moreover, the debtor was released from bankruptcy within three years before the order.