Florentine v Chang-Time (203 of 2000) [2005] SCSC 10 (25 September 2005)

Florentine v Chang-Time (203 of 2000) [2005] SCSC 10 (25 September 2005)

The defendant misrepresented herself as owner, received the full purchase price, and failed to transfer the property, constituting a breach of contract. The plaintiff is entitled to recover the sum paid and reasonable moral damages, but not double the deposit as the payment was not a deposit under Article 1590.

Citation
[2005] SCSC 10
Parties
Plaintiff: Georgette Florentine; Defendant: Edline Chang-Time
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
25 September 2005
Case Number
203 of 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff; counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation, Damages
Source Language
English

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

Parties

Georgette Florentine

Plaintiff

Edline Chang-Time

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the promise of sale agreement
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to specific performance or damages
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to double the deposit under Article 1590 of the Civil Code

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant misrepresented herself as owner, received the full purchase price, and failed to transfer the property, constituting a breach of contract. The plaintiff is entitled to recover the sum paid and reasonable moral damages, but not double the deposit as the payment was not a deposit under Article 1590.

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff; counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay plaintiff SR315,000 with interest at 4% per annum from 17th May 1999
  • Defendant to pay costs