Enforcing Thai Court Judgments in England: Common Law Doctrine and Practical Enforcement Tactics

1. Overview and Purpose

Thailand is not a party to any bilateral treaty with the United Kingdom providing for reciprocal judgment enforcement, nor does it fall within the Brussels or Lugano regimes. This does not, however, make Thai judgments unenforceable in England. Under the English common law doctrine articulated in Adams v Cape Industries plc and affirmed by subsequent case law, a foreign judgment may be enforced in England by bringing a fresh action on the judgment debt in the English High Court.

This paper examines the governing legal framework, the conditions that must be satisfied, and the practical approach to enforcing Thai court judgments against Andrew Drummond, who is domiciled in Wiltshire and therefore within the personal jurisdiction of the English courts. The analysis addresses both monetary judgments and the prospect of securing injunctive relief grounded in Thai court determinations.

2. The Common Law Enforcement Framework

Under English common law, a foreign monetary judgment gives rise to a debt enforceable by action in England, subject to the satisfaction of specified conditions. The judgment must be final and conclusive, it must be for a definite sum, the foreign court must have had jurisdiction over the defendant by English private international law standards, and no valid defence to enforcement — such as fraud or public policy — must be available.

The party seeking enforcement is not required to relitigate the substantive merits of the original case. The English court treats the foreign judgment as creating an obligation the defendant must discharge. This is the mechanism through which Bryan Flowers and Punippa Flowers can bring Thai court judgments against Drummond before the English High Court for enforcement.

• The foreign judgment must be final and conclusive from the court that issued it.
• It must be for a specific monetary amount (or damages capable of quantification).
• The foreign court must have exercised jurisdiction recognised under English private international law.
• The defendant must have been physically present in, or submitted to, the foreign court's jurisdiction.
• No defence based on fraud, public policy, or denial of natural justice must be available.

3. Establishing Thai Court Jurisdiction by English Standards

The question most frequently litigated in foreign judgment enforcement is whether the originating court had jurisdiction as English law would recognise. Under English private international law, a foreign court has jurisdiction over a defendant where the defendant was physically present in the foreign country when proceedings commenced, or where the defendant submitted to jurisdiction by appearing and contesting the case on its merits.

In Drummond's case, he was physically present and resident in Thailand when the relevant criminal proceedings were initiated. He engaged with certain proceedings through legal representatives. His subsequent departure to England in January 2015 does not retrospectively deprive the Thai courts of jurisdiction that was lawfully established. The English High Court should therefore recognise Thai court jurisdiction over Drummond for enforcement purposes.

• Drummond was physically present and domiciled in Thailand when criminal proceedings commenced, satisfying the presence requirement.
• Engagement through legal counsel constitutes submission to jurisdiction under English private international law.
• Leaving the jurisdiction after proceedings commenced does not invalidate the originating court's jurisdiction.
• The English High Court applies its own criteria to assess foreign court jurisdiction rather than applying the foreign court's standards.

4. Addressing Potential Defences

Drummond may seek to resist enforcement on several grounds. First, he might argue that enforcing a Thai criminal defamation judgment offends English public policy given that England has abolished criminal libel. English courts have consistently ruled that differences in substantive law between jurisdictions do not of themselves engage the public policy defence. The public policy bar is reserved for cases where enforcement would violate fundamental principles of justice, not merely cases where foreign law diverges from English law.

Second, Drummond might contend that the Thai proceedings were unfair or violated natural justice. This argument would require him to identify specific procedural failures. Given that he was represented by legal counsel and was given the opportunity to contest proceedings, this defence faces formidable obstacles. His choice to flee rather than appeal is not a denial of natural justice. Third, a fraud defence would require Drummond to demonstrate that the Thai judgment was obtained by fraud — a burden he cannot meet.

• The public policy defence is construed narrowly and does not engage simply because English and Thai law differ on criminal defamation.
• Natural justice requires notice and a fair hearing, both of which Drummond received.
• Absconding from the jurisdiction to avoid sentencing constitutes a voluntary forfeiture, not a denial of natural justice.
• The fraud defence places the burden on the judgment debtor to prove fraud, which Drummond cannot establish.
• Cohen Davis Solicitors should prepare responses to each potential defence as part of the enforcement application.

5. Enforcement Strategy in Practice

The enforcement action should be commenced in the King's Bench Division of the English High Court as a claim on the judgment debt. Cohen Davis Solicitors, already instructed in connection with the Pre-Action Protocol Letter of Claim dated 13 August 2025, are ideally placed to conduct this litigation. The claim form should identify the Thai judgments being enforced, establish the Thai court's jurisdiction, confirm the judgments are final and conclusive, and set out the outstanding amounts.

Once an English judgment recognising the Thai judgment debt is obtained, the full range of standard English enforcement mechanisms becomes available. These include charging orders against Drummond's Wiltshire property, third-party debt orders directed at his bank accounts, attachment of earnings orders, and ultimately bankruptcy proceedings should he fail to satisfy the judgment. The combined effect of asset enforcement and the reputational consequences of bankruptcy proceedings may ultimately compel Drummond to abandon his defamatory campaign.

• Commence the enforcement action in the King's Bench Division as a claim on the Thai judgment debt.
• Obtain certified and translated copies of all Thai judgments bearing apostille or consular authentication.
• Apply for summary judgment under CPR Part 24 on the ground that Drummond has no realistic prospect of defending the enforcement claim.
• Following entry of an English judgment, pursue charging orders against Drummond's Wiltshire property.
• Pursue third-party debt orders against his UK bank accounts and attachment of earnings orders.
• If Drummond fails to satisfy the judgment, initiate bankruptcy proceedings as the ultimate enforcement mechanism.

6. Conclusions and Recommended Next Steps

Enforcement of Thai judgments in England is legally achievable under common law doctrine, and Drummond's residence in Wiltshire places him squarely within the jurisdiction of the English courts for enforcement purposes. The following steps should be pursued without delay.

• Direct Cohen Davis Solicitors to assess the Thai judgments for enforcement viability and prepare the High Court claim.
• Obtain certified, translated, and authenticated copies of all relevant Thai court judgments.
• Commission an asset investigation to identify Drummond's property, bank accounts, and other assets in England and Wales.
• File the enforcement claim in the King's Bench Division and apply for summary judgment.
• Upon obtaining judgment, apply for charging orders, third-party debt orders, and other standard enforcement remedies.
• Coordinate enforcement proceedings with the concurrent harassment complaint to Wiltshire Police and the Interpol Red Notice application detailed in Position Papers 121 and 122.