immovable property saleauthority of agentspecific performanceeviction
Tags
immovable propertyagencycontract of salespecific performance
legislation
Statutes Cited
E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n
C
o
n
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
o
n
H
u
m
a
n
R
i
g
h
t
s
1
9
5
0
H
u
m
a
n
R
i
g
h
t
s
A
c
t
1
9
9
8
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
1
9
7
1
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
t
y
,
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
s
y
l
u
m
A
c
t
2
0
0
2
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
A
c
t
1
9
9
7
T
r
i
b
u
n
a
l
s
,
C
o
u
r
t
s
a
n
d
E
n
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
A
c
t
2
0
0
7
C
o
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l
R
e
f
o
r
m
A
c
t
2
0
0
5
S
e
n
i
o
r
C
o
u
r
t
s
A
c
t
1
9
8
1
S
u
p
r
e
m
e
C
o
u
r
t
A
c
t
1
9
8
1
C
o
u
r
t
s
a
n
d
L
e
g
a
l
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
A
c
t
1
9
9
0
A
c
c
e
s
s
t
o
J
u
s
t
i
c
e
A
c
t
1
9
9
9
C
r
i
m
i
n
a
l
J
u
s
t
i
c
e
a
n
d
C
o
u
r
t
s
A
c
t
2
0
1
5
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
s
y
l
u
m
A
c
t
1
9
9
9
A
n
t
i
-
t
e
r
r
o
r
i
s
m
,
C
r
i
m
e
a
n
d
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
A
c
t
2
0
0
1
P
r
e
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
o
f
T
e
r
r
o
r
i
s
m
A
c
t
2
0
0
5
T
e
r
r
o
r
i
s
m
A
c
t
2
0
0
0
T
e
r
r
o
r
i
s
m
A
c
t
2
0
0
6
C
o
u
n
t
e
r
-
T
e
r
r
o
r
i
s
m
A
c
t
2
0
0
8
J
u
s
t
i
c
e
a
n
d
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
A
c
t
2
0
1
3
D
a
t
a
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
1
9
9
8
F
r
e
e
d
o
m
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
2
0
0
0
E
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
A
c
t
2
0
1
0
L
e
g
a
l
A
i
d
,
S
e
n
t
e
n
c
i
n
g
a
n
d
P
u
n
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
o
f
O
f
f
e
n
d
e
r
s
A
c
t
2
0
1
2
C
r
i
m
e
a
n
d
C
o
u
r
t
s
A
c
t
2
0
1
3
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
2
0
1
4
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
A
c
t
2
0
1
6
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether second defendant had authority to bind first defendant in the sale of immovable property","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Second defendant signed agreement; first defendant disputed authorisation; mother-daughter relationship"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Plaintiff purchased a subdivided portion of immovable property from second defendant who claimed to act as agent for first defendant. First defendant disputed authorising the sale and sought eviction. Court found valid agency relationship existed and ordered specific performance.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases