- Flynote
- Contract Law|Enforcement of contract
- Case summary
- The court held that the grounds of appeal were argumentative and too general. That the respondent is precluded from denying ownership since the signed addendum shows that the appellant was the owner of the suit property. That the trial court erred in law when he considered the issue of jurisdiction that had already been dealt with by the same court. That the respondents are not to pay any sums since the appellant had already recovered by paying themselves.
Loading PDF...
This document is 851.1 KB. Do you want to load it?