El blog de Maria

Your daily Spanish Law reporter. Have it with a cafe con leche.
www.costaluzlawyers.es

Legal tip 436. Another good pieces of Case Law by the provintial Appeal Court of Murcia.
24 January 2011 @ 13:17

On the 6th of July of 2010.- Change of the contract object. 180 º change in the apartment orientation is considered by the Appeal Court as an "essential" breach of the purchase contract by the developer. The Court Decission refers to Supreme Court previous Case Law by which it is clear that in "obligaciones de dar" (obligations involving the handing of a certain object) , the seller cannot impose the buyer to receive anything different. The buyer has a right to receive an iddentical object. Similar objects cannot be imposed to be received by the buyer as this would involve a clear legal insecurity to the buyer.

On the 28th of October of 2010.- Law 57/68 is special and imperative ( non waivable) so it is always applicable regardless private agreements and regulations of private order.

Grazalema Two Towers by Paco Ramirez at Facebook

Permalink

1 Comments

Keith said:
24 January 2011 @ 14:34

Excellent, María

So Judges are finally accepting that the rights given to buyers by LEY 57/68 are of a 'Caracter de Irrenunciables' - INALIENABLE - and are so strong they cannot be waived even at the request of the buyer.

Therefore a legitimate and legal purchase contract MUST comply with all requirements of LEY 57/68.

Also from the Cantabria case we know that "The relationship between the Purchaser and the financial entity do not derive primarily from the contract or guarantee but from the Law"

There now seems to be many significant comments by Judges in various examples of Case Law which give excellent support and judicial understanding of the liabilities of the Banks according to LEY 57/68.

More power to the consumer!!

Kind regards

Keith