Labiche v Francoise & Anor (CS 102/1999) [2004] SCSC 37 (21 June 2004)

Labiche v Francoise & Anor (CS 102/1999) [2004] SCSC 37 (21 June 2004)

The Plaintiff was permitted by the First Defendant to build a house on the property, invested materials and labour, and is entitled to reimbursement under Article 555(3) of the Civil Code. The Defendants' counterclaim does not arise out of the subject matter of the action as required by Section 80(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure and is therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2004] SCSC 37
Parties
Plaintiff: Labiche; Defendant: Francoise & Or
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
21 June 2004
Case Number
CS 102/1999
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff; counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Building on Another's Land, Reimbursement for Improvements, Counterclaim Procedure, Delictual Claims
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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Labiche

Plaintiff

Francoise & Or

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to reimbursement for materials and labour expended in building a house on the Defendants' land under Article 555(3) of the Civil Code
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants' counterclaim for damages based on alleged faute is maintainable

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff was permitted by the First Defendant to build a house on the property, invested materials and labour, and is entitled to reimbursement under Article 555(3) of the Civil Code. The Defendants' counterclaim does not arise out of the subject matter of the action as required by Section 80(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure and is therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff; counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff awarded R29,812.80 with interests and costs
  • Defendants' counterclaim dismissed