Andre v Andre (CS 385/1998) [2002] SCSC 9 (23 September 2002)

Andre v Andre (CS 385/1998) [2002] SCSC 9 (23 September 2002)

There was no satisfactory evidence that the alleged condition regarding the Defendant's concubine was part of the agreement at the time the thing and price were agreed; even if such a condition existed, it would be contrary to public policy and unlawful. Therefore, the promise to sell was equivalent to a sale, and the Defendant is the valid owner of the parcel.

Citation
[2002] SCSC 9
Parties
Plaintiff: Andre (Plaintiff); Defendant: Andre (Defendant)
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
23 September 2002
Case Number
CS 385/1998
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Plaint dismissed; valid sale declared in favour of Defendant.
Legal Topics
Sale of Land, Promise to Sell, Conditions Precedent, Public Policy, Family Protection
Source Language
English
Property Law Contract Law Sale of Land Promise to Sell Conditions Precedent Public Policy Family Protection

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andre (Plaintiff)

Plaintiff

Andre (Defendant)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral promise to sell land subject to conditions constitutes a valid sale
  2. 2 Whether the alleged condition (not to bring concubine onto land) was part of the agreement and enforceable
  3. 3 Whether public policy or family protection invalidates the alleged condition

Ratio Decidendi

There was no satisfactory evidence that the alleged condition regarding the Defendant's concubine was part of the agreement at the time the thing and price were agreed; even if such a condition existed, it would be contrary to public policy and unlawful. Therefore, the promise to sell was equivalent to a sale, and the Defendant is the valid owner of the parcel.

Court Disposition

Plaint dismissed; valid sale declared in favour of Defendant.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to transfer Parcel B 4142 to Defendant by notarial deed within two months; failing which, Land Registrar to register Defendant as proprietor under Section 75 of the Land Registration Act.
  • No order as to costs.