Phya Seewikramatit v Ministry of Commerce

• Jurisdiction: Tailandia
• Date: 18 July 1955
• Court: Supreme Court (Thailand)

Thailand, Supreme Court.

(Prawat Pattapongs, Silapasit Winitchai and Prasart Winitchai JJ.)

Phya Seewikramatit

and

Ministry of Commerce.

Belligerent Occupation — Administrative Powers of Occupant — Whether Binding on Lawful Authorities — Invasion of Siam by Japan — Subsequent Occupation of Siam by Allied Forces — Public Sale of Public Property of Japanese Imperial Navy by Allied Occupying Authorities — Validity of Title Acquired.

The Facts.—Prior to the Second World War, the plaintiff had let a parcel of land in Bangkok, Siam, to Mitsui Bishi Saiyee Kaisha & Co., a Japanese corporation. Siam was neutral at the beginning of the war. On December 8, 1941, Japanese armed forces invaded South and Central Siam. Immediately after the invasion negotiations took place between the two Governments, with the result that the Siamese Government was to permit the passage of Japanese troops through Siam. Mitsui Bishi Saiyee Kaisha & Co. sublet the piece of property in question to the Japanese Imperial Navy, units of which, together with other Japanese forces, were then stationed in Bangkok in accordance with the Treaty of Alliance concluded between the two Governments on December 21, 1941, subsequent to the landing of Japanese marines and armed forces in Siam. The sub-lessee, then present in Siam as foreign visiting forces1 under the

Treaty of Alliance, tore down the original buildings and harbour belonging to the lessee, and built a new harbour in its place, with new warehouses and roads. The property was occupied by the Japanese Navy and continuously used by it for public purposes until the unconditional surrender of Japan. Pursuant to the Ghandi (Colombo) Agreement of September 8, 1945, between the Allied Powers and Siam1 the Allied Armed Forces entered the territory of Siam and remained stationed there for the purpose of disarming Japanese troops then still present in Siam and accepting their surrender. While in Bangkok, the Allied Forces sold the above-mentioned warehouses at an auction sale to the plaintiff. Meanwhile, municipal legislation was introduced to create a National Commission to administer the residue of Japanese property in Siam. The defendant had been in possession of the warehouses and continued to use them on the alleged authorization by the National Commission. The plaintiff brought an action before the Civil Court for the recovery of the warehouses and claimed damages in respect of the wrongful possession of them by the defendant and of special physical damage done to the premises

The Civil Court decided in favour of the plaintiff, ordering recovery of the warehouses, payment of damages for wrongful possession, and reimbursement of the costs of repairing the harbour and warehouses.

The Court of Appeal, on September 15, 1953, reaffirmed the judgment of the Civil Court. The defendant appealed further to the Supreme Court.

Held: that the appeal must be dismissed. The Court found, inter alia, that the Government of Siam had agreed to allow the Allied Forces or the Forces of the United Nations to stay in Siam with the view to disarming Japanese fighting elements there, and that, therefore, the Allied Forces, representing the victorious Powers, had rights of administration over property of the Japanese Forces, including the power of sale. The National Commission administering the property of Japanese had no power to authorize anyone to use the warehouses which the plaintiff had lawfully bought from the United Nations Occupation Authorities. The defendant must therefore be liable for wrongfully using the warehouses without the plaintiff's permission notwithstanding previous authorization by the National Commission.

The Court said: “The facts as appear from the evidence before the Court are as follows. In a lease granted by the plaintiff...