Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSharrock, Robert
dc.date.accessioned2015-02-05T10:20:36Z
dc.date.available2015-02-05T10:20:36Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.citationSharrock, R. 2014. Rectification and party misdescription: to what extent is rectification competent or useful? Potchefstroom electronic law journal (PELJ) = Potchefstroomse elektroniese regsblad (PER), 17(5):2195-2207 [http://www.nwu.ac.za/p-per/index.html]en_US
dc.identifier.issn1727-3781
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10394/13315
dc.description.abstractThe decision in Osborne v West Dunes Properties 176 2013 6 SA 105 (WCC) raises some interesting issues regarding the competence or usefulness of rectifying an incorrect party description in a contract required by law to be in writing and signed. This case note explains and critically analyses the court's reasoning on these issues and suggests that courts should bear in mind certain important principles when dealing with a problem of this nature.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectAlienation of Land Act 68 of 1981en_US
dc.subjectPrinciple of certaintyen_US
dc.subjectFormal agreementen_US
dc.subjectLocus standien_US
dc.subjectRectificationen_US
dc.titleRectification and party misdescription: to what extent is rectification competent or useful?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record