Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The modern trend in the U.S. is that the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose applies in the real-estate context to only the sale of new residential housing by a builder-seller and that the caveat emptor rule applies to all other real-estate sale situations (e.g. homeowner to buyer). [3]
In construction contracting, a latent defect is defined as a defect which exists at the time of acceptance but cannot be discovered by a reasonable inspection. [2]In the 1864 US case of Dermott v Jones, the latent defect lay in the soil on which a property had been built, giving rise to problems which subsequently made the house "uninhabitable and dangerous".
At least in the United States, the principle of caveat emptor ("let the buyer beware") was held for many years to govern sales. As the idea of an implied warranty of habitability began to find purchase, however, issues like the stigma attached to a property based on acts, "haunting", or criminal activity began to make their way into legal precedents.
caveat: May he beware When used by itself, refers to a qualification, or warning. caveat emptor: Let the buyer beware In addition to the general warning, also refers to a legal doctrine wherein a buyer could not get relief from a seller for defects present on property which rendered it unfit for use. / ˈ k æ v i æ t ˈ ɛ m p t ɔːr ...
The Land Titles Office cannot register any transactions regarding the estate while a caveat applies. [5] A lapsing notice will require the caveator to commence Supreme Court proceedings and obtain an extension of the caveat within days of the date on which the notice was served. If the caveator does not take action, the caveat will lapse. [8 ...
Caveat emptor Chandelor v Lopus (1603) 79 ER 3 [ 1 ] is a famous case in the common law of England . [ 2 ] It stands for the distinction between warranties and mere affirmations and announced the rule of caveat emptor (buyer beware).
Stambovsky v. Ackley, 169 A.D.2d 254 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991), commonly known as the Ghostbusters ruling, was a case in the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division.The court held that a house, which the owner had previously advertised as haunted by ghosts, was legally haunted for the purpose of an action for rescission brought by a subsequent purchaser of the house.
Money damages. Liquidated, stipulated, or penal damages 3; ... Traditionally this is caveat emptor (let the buyer beware), and under common law caveat venditor ...