1.1) Advise if Davy and Daniel concluded a valid contract of sale.
NO the contract between Davy and Daniel is voide
When entering into a contract, parties are expected to negotiate and agree on the terms with
due diligence. However, sometimes defects in the subject of the agreement may not be
immediately apparent and only discovered after signing the contract. These defects are known
as latent defects. The presence of such defects may invalidate a contract if they represent a
substantial breach of what was agreed upon. For example, if parties entered into an agreement
for the sale of a property without knowing it had significant structural damage, then the contract
could be invalidated due to this latent defect. However, not all latent defects will necessarily
invalidate a contract; it depends on how serious they are in relation to what was agreed upon by
both parties during negotiations. Therefore, it is essential that all material facts about the subject
matter of any contractual agreements are fully disclosed to prevent any future legal disputes or
invalidation of contracts based on hidden defects.
1.2) Critically discuss if Davy will be able to institute a claim for latent defects against
Daniel.
Yes, Davy is liable to claim because the seller (Daniel) is held liable for any latent defects in the
works which are present at the time of the sale and which either destroys or substantially
impairs its utility or effectiveness for the purpose for which it was sold or for which it is
commonly used.
The defect must have been present at the time of purchase, and it must be serious enough to
significantly impact the value or use of the property. Additionally, Davy must demonstrate that
the seller(Daniel) was aware of the defect and failed to disclose it before the sale. If these
conditions are met, purchasers may be able to negotiate compensation or even rescind the sale
entirely. A purchaser(Davy) who wants to claim because of a latent defect in the merx
must prove that he or she was unaware of the defect when the contract was concluded.
1.3) Apply the applicable remedy for the breach of the implied warranty against the latent
defect in the scenario above.
NO the contract between Davy and Daniel is voide
When entering into a contract, parties are expected to negotiate and agree on the terms with
due diligence. However, sometimes defects in the subject of the agreement may not be
immediately apparent and only discovered after signing the contract. These defects are known
as latent defects. The presence of such defects may invalidate a contract if they represent a
substantial breach of what was agreed upon. For example, if parties entered into an agreement
for the sale of a property without knowing it had significant structural damage, then the contract
could be invalidated due to this latent defect. However, not all latent defects will necessarily
invalidate a contract; it depends on how serious they are in relation to what was agreed upon by
both parties during negotiations. Therefore, it is essential that all material facts about the subject
matter of any contractual agreements are fully disclosed to prevent any future legal disputes or
invalidation of contracts based on hidden defects.
1.2) Critically discuss if Davy will be able to institute a claim for latent defects against
Daniel.
Yes, Davy is liable to claim because the seller (Daniel) is held liable for any latent defects in the
works which are present at the time of the sale and which either destroys or substantially
impairs its utility or effectiveness for the purpose for which it was sold or for which it is
commonly used.
The defect must have been present at the time of purchase, and it must be serious enough to
significantly impact the value or use of the property. Additionally, Davy must demonstrate that
the seller(Daniel) was aware of the defect and failed to disclose it before the sale. If these
conditions are met, purchasers may be able to negotiate compensation or even rescind the sale
entirely. A purchaser(Davy) who wants to claim because of a latent defect in the merx
must prove that he or she was unaware of the defect when the contract was concluded.
1.3) Apply the applicable remedy for the breach of the implied warranty against the latent
defect in the scenario above.
