prescriptionres judicatabreach of contractspecific performancedamagescontract of saleimmovable property
Tags
prescriptionres judicatabreach of contractspecific performancedamages
legislation
Statutes Cited
Prescription Act
Prescription Act
Prescription Act
Prescription Act
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the plaintiffs' claim for damages had prescribed","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Cause of action arose in 2003; summons issued 2004-09-09; Supreme Court dismissed appeal 2006-06-19"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the plea of res judicata applies","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Same parties; same subject matter; same cause of action previously determined"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Plaintiffs, husband and wife, originally claimed specific performance for transfer of immovable property. After losing in both High Court and Supreme Court, they instituted fresh action claiming damages for breach of contract. Defendants raised special pleas of prescription and res judicata.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases