Kwetey V Btchway Case Study

1431 Words6 Pages
The KWETEY v. BOTCHWAY AND ANOTHER case explains the principle of “you cannot give what you do not have” which has its Latin as “Nemo dat quod non habet”. In this case, the bank, wanted to sell a boat that rightfully belonged to Kwetey and this was established by the court to be against the principle stated supra. The facts in Kwetey v Botchway are that the plaintiff had mortgaged his house to the Agricultural Development Bank (ADB) to secure a loan to replace a broken marine engine in a 40-footer fishing boat that he had acquired through a hire-purchase agreement. As part of a general exercise, the ADB rehabilitated all broken down engines of all fishing vessels belonging to its customers and gave the customers the first option of paying whatever balance was outstanding or have the boat sold to someone else who…show more content…
In the case of NANOR v. AUTO PARTS LTD, Nanor (plaintiff) entered into a contract with Auto Parts Ltd to buy a Nissan Homer. He paid ¢19,000.00 to Auto Parts for the price of the vehicle and Auto Parts promised to get the vehicle ready for collection by 29 December 1977 which the failed to deliver. On 11 January 1978, Nanor paid a further ¢1000.00 to Auto Parts at the request of Auto Parts claiming that the price of the vehicle has changed and that the vehicle was being shipped to them. Auto Parts refused to give the vehicle to Nanor when the vehicles arrived. Claiming they were meant for other customers. Nanor then brought an action seeking specific performance of the contract or in the alternative damages for breach of contract. Auto Parts contended Nanor’s claims. The court found that the ¢19,000 initially paid by Nanor was on account; and that the agreed date for delivery was 29 December

    More about Kwetey V Btchway Case Study

      Open Document