The Role of Good Faith in Pre-Contractual Liability

Abstract

Breaking off the negotiation phase, which contrary to the good faith principle and cause the damages to the party, it shall be unjustified to the aggrieved party if the law cannot be enforced and claimed to the party who acts in bad faith during the pre-contractual stage, in particular, when the parties highly expect to reach the final agreement and preliminary commence the work without having the formal execution of written agreement due to the mutual trust, strictly due date, or any demonstrate commitment. Such breaking off contrary to the good faith principle shall cause the damage to the aggrieved party especially with the project which has significant and large-scale of investment value which may not be able to claim the pre-contractual liability from the other party.

As it can be seen that the pre-contractual liability is still unclear and struggled in practice under the Thailand Civil and Commercial Code and still argue the alternative solutions among the legal practitioner in Thailand.

 Hence, this individual study therefore will address on the controversial of pre-contractual liability and focus on the analysis of role of good faith principle in pre-contractual liability which it can be regarded as the alternative solution by comparing with the English law throughout the recent court cases which has started to imply the good faith principle to justify the court cases. Thailand might learn from the implication of good faith principle from English court and solve with the issue of pre-contractual liability during the negotiation causing by the bad faith of the party and justify the aggrieved party.