This is an AI-generated summary of a selected monitored public legal source and may omit context. It is general information only, not legal advice, and is not a substitute for reading the source or consulting an attorney.
AI summary
The Supreme Court of Appeal considered when a debt arising from a home builder’s breach of a warranty to repair major structural defects became due for prescription purposes. It upheld the appeal, set aside the full court order, and remitted the matter to the trial court for determination of the merits.
This appears to concern prescription and housing consumer warranty disputes under the Prescription Act and the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Act.
Evidence from source
The appeal concerns the question of some practical importance in the law of prescription: when does a debt arising from a home builder’s breach of a warranty to repair major structural defects become ‘due’ within the meaning of s 12(3)
Supports: plain_summary sentence 1