Amendment of Pleadings After Settlement of Issues: Increase of Claim and Objection to Plaintiff’s Locus Standi
In this case, Mr. Chob, as plaintiff, brought an action against Mr. Tham, the defendant, claiming THB 20,000. The defendant filed a statement of defence denying the plaintiff’s claim in its entirety, asserting that he had never purchased tea from the plaintiff and was therefore under no indebtedness to him. After the court had completed the settlement of issues, but before the plaintiff’s evidentiary hearing, the plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to amend the plaint by increasing the amount claimed to THB 40,000, alleging that he had previously omitted such amount by oversight. The defendant, in turn, filed a motion seeking leave to amend his defence by raising the objection that the plaintiff lacked locus standi to institute the action.
The court must dismiss the plaintiff’s motion to amend the plaint, since the plaintiff failed to seek such amendment before the settlement of issues, although he was able to do so. The ground asserted, namely mere oversight, is attributable solely to the plaintiff’s own negligence, and the proposed increase in the amount claimed does not concern any matter of public order. By contrast, the defendant’s proposed amendment, namely the objection that the plaintiff lacks the authority to sue, concerns an issue of public order. Accordingly, even though the motion to amend the defence was filed after the settlement of issues, the court may grant leave for such amendment.