Rosemary Nweze and Christian Nweze v Nwoko
Publication details: 2004Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2004] EWCA Civ 379, 29 March 2004. Appellant appealed against the Recorder's decision that the compromise oral agreement between the parties to sell a property at the best price,could not be enforced under the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 s2 as it did not fulfil the criteria of being a contract for sale or other deposition of an interest in the land. The Recorder had also ruled that the original sale agreement was not enforceable under s2 of the Act and this was not part of the appeal. The terms of the compromise oral agreement are outlined in para 6 and the legal interpretation of s2 are discussed in para 14."Held": that the compromise agreement was not enforceable under s2. View judgment at www.bailii.org.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS67867 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 126191-1001 | |
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 126191-2001 |
[2004] EWCA Civ 379, 29 March 2004. Appellant appealed against the Recorder's decision that the compromise oral agreement between the parties to sell a property at the best price,could not be enforced under the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 s2 as it did not fulfil the criteria of being a contract for sale or other deposition of an interest in the land. The Recorder had also ruled that the original sale agreement was not enforceable under s2 of the Act and this was not part of the appeal. The terms of the compromise oral agreement are outlined in para 6 and the legal interpretation of s2 are discussed in para 14."Held": that the compromise agreement was not enforceable under s2. View judgment at www.bailii.org.