Justifications for not alienating or acquiring the immovable following a promise of sale or purchase agreement

Abstract

One of the main aims of this thesis is to identify and analyse the situations where a person bound under a promise to sell or a promise to buy is entitled not to proceed with the definitive sale. It analyses the legal provisions applicable to konvenji and their effects on the validity and or unenforceability of the same. Moreover, this thesis explores in depth the court judgements on the reasons which they have held to be valid at law for a person not to purchase or sell an immovable following a preliminary agreement. The enunciations of the courts will result to be the most important source of elucidation on this subject. Chapter 1 introduces the promise to sell and the promise to buy as a contract, and also the preliminary agreements where these promises are incorporated in one instrument. Then it proceeds to tackle the preliminary issues relating to the concept of valid reasons at law not to proceed with the definitive transfer following a konvenju. Chapter 2 deals with situations where a promisor may be justified not to purchase or sell owing to certain factors which may impinge on the validity of the konvenju. If a konvenju is invalid or null, it will be unenforceable. Chapter 3 discusses the instances which the courts have deemed to be justifications not to finalise a sale or purchase and which are reminiscent of the provisions applicable to a final contract of sale. It also examines divergences in case-law on the subject and the extension of the concept of fear of eviction. Chapter 4 deals with the preliminary contract as being itself the source of a party's entitlement not to finalise a sale. It also considers the most common conditions recurring in konvenji.