Verbal Agreement Right Of Way
Mr. Pezaro was not known and sold her house in the summer of 2010. In the summer of 2011, when Mr. Pezaro wanted to do something about the priority right issue, number 147 was now owned by Mr. and Mrs. Bourne. The Pezaros asked the court to confirm that the right of priority had been extinguished. They submitted that they had relied on the agreement with Ayers, so that the Owner Estoppel was born and the Bournes were unable to enforce the right of priority. In Matchmove Ltd v. Dowding and Church, an argument broke out between two former friends who had initially agreed on the sale of a building plot and a meadow. “An oral contract is the paper on which it is written is not worth” (Samuel Goldwyn) Verbal agreements in South Africa are generally as binding and valid as written. Of course, it`s a bad idea not to register your agreements in writing – oral agreements are a recipe for doubts and disputes, and proof of the precise terms agreed will be a challenge, if not impossible.
In addition, certain types of contracts must be written and signed by all parties to be valid. In South Africa, for example, an oral contract for the sale, exchange or donation of land or “interest in land” is not applicable. A recent High Court case shows the danger of neglecting this requirement… Two characteristics, no priority right We often use the phrase “My word is my ribbon” to indicate the binding nature of an oral agreement, but the dangers of relying solely on words have been highlighted recently in a dispute over the sale of land. People often feel like they are saving money by not getting legal advice at an early stage. Sometimes, of course, they`re right. But it`s often not long before you learn whether it saves money or not. If things go wrong, the cost of the improvement will often be 10 or even a hundred times more expensive than the cost would have been.
In early 2010, Mr. Pezaro intended to build a new property next to number 151. At this point, they learned that the priority right of the 1960s was still final. It had to be officially “withdrawn” in writing in order for its oral agreement with Mr. Ayres to be fully effective. Mr. Bourne and Ms. Bourne were contacted by Mr. Pezaro to see if they would complete the necessary legal documents to implement what had previously been agreed by Mr. Ayres.