Nweze & Anor v Nwoko [2004] EWCA Civ 379 (29 March 2004)

Nweze & Anor v Nwoko [2004] EWCA Civ 379 (29 March 2004)

The oral compromise agreement did not itself effect a sale or disposition of an interest in land but merely required the property to be marketed and, if a buyer was found, for a sale to be entered into. Therefore, it was not a contract for the sale or other disposition of an interest in land within Section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and was enforceable despite not being in writing.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 379
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Rosemary Nweze; Appellant/defendant: Christian Nweze; Respondent/claimant: Nwoko
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 2 Law of Property (miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989, Oral Compromise Agreements, Specific Performance, Formalities for Sale of Land
Property Law Contract Law Section 2 Law of Property (miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 Oral Compromise Agreements Specific Performance Formalities for Sale of Land

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rosemary Nweze

Appellant/defendant

Christian Nweze

Appellant/defendant

Nwoko

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral compromise agreement requiring sale of property is a contract for the sale or other disposition of an interest in land within Section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and thus unenforceable if not in writing.

Ratio Decidendi

The oral compromise agreement did not itself effect a sale or disposition of an interest in land but merely required the property to be marketed and, if a buyer was found, for a sale to be entered into. Therefore, it was not a contract for the sale or other disposition of an interest in land within Section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and was enforceable despite not being in writing.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Specific performance of the oral compromise agreement ordered
  • Permission to appeal to House of Lords refused