ITEM VIEW

On constitutive formalities, estoppel and breaking the rules

dc.contributor.authorMyburgh, Franziskaen_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-28T09:58:04Z
dc.date.available2018-09-28T09:58:04Z
dc.date.issued2016-08
dc.identifier.citationMyburgh, F. 2016. On constitutive formalities, estoppel and breaking the rules. Stellenbosch Law Review, 27(2):254-272.en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn1996-2193 (online)
dc.identifier.issn1016-4359 (print)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/104534
dc.descriptionCITATION: Myburgh, F. 2016. On constitutive formalities, estoppel and breaking the rules. Stellenbosch Law Review, 27(2):254-272.en_ZA
dc.descriptionThe original publication is available at https://journals.co.za/content/journal/jlc_slren_ZA
dc.description.abstractThis article focuses on the general rule in South African law that a successful reliance on estoppel should not result in the enforcement of an agreement prohibited by law.1 More particularly, it considers the application of the rule in the context of formally defective sales of land and suretyships, where section 2(1) of the Alienation of Land Act 68 of 1981 and section 6 of General Law Amendment Act 50 of 1956 respectively prescribe nullity in the event of formal non-compliance. The contention is that the blanket exclusion of estoppel here should be reconsidered.en_ZA
dc.language.isoen_ZAen_ZA
dc.publisherJuta Lawen_ZA
dc.subjectestoppelen_ZA
dc.subjectdefective sales of landen_ZA
dc.subjectAlienation of Land Acten_ZA
dc.subjectdefective sales of landen_ZA
dc.titleOn constitutive formalities, estoppel and breaking the rulesen_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA
dc.description.versionPublishers versionen_ZA
dc.rights.holderJuta Lawen_ZA


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

ITEM VIEW