Sec 0177: Difference between revisions
From Thai Codification Codes of 1925
m 1 revision imported |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
====== '''《Comments》''' ====== | ====== '''《Comments》''' ====== | ||
<u>The most plausible model</u> for this section would be: | |||
* Japanese Civil Code (1896,98), Art. 152: | |||
** Participation in bankruptcy procedure does not have the effect of interrupting prescription if the creditor cancels it or if the demand is rejected and dismissed. | |||
Revision as of 13:30, 11 May 2025
มาตรา 177
- การยื่นคำร้องขอพิสูจน์หนี้ในคดีล้มละลาย ท่านไม่นับว่าเป็นเหตุให้อายุความสดุดหยุดลง หากว่าใบพิสูจน์หนี้นั้นได้ถอนเสีย ละทิ้งเสีย หรือต้องยกเสียแล้ว
《References》
☆ quoted from “INDEX” with supplementary entries in […]: Images in Archives
- Old Text (1923): 438 par.2 [??] [438 No.2]
- New Text (1992): 193/18
- Jp. Code (1896,98): *152
- Gr. Code (1896): [214(II)]
- Miscellaneous:
《Comments》
The most plausible model for this section would be:
- Japanese Civil Code (1896,98), Art. 152:
- Participation in bankruptcy procedure does not have the effect of interrupting prescription if the creditor cancels it or if the demand is rejected and dismissed.
