Table of Contents
SECTION III – OF THE WARRANTY OF THE DEFECTS OF THE THING SOLD OR OF THE REDHIBITORY VICES
Art. 65. Redhibition is the cancelling of the sale on account of some defect in the thing sold, such as may be sufficient to oblige the seller to take it back again and have the sale annulled.
Art. 66. The seller is bound to declare to the buyer the defects of the thing sold, as far as they are known to him, and if he does not do it, the sale shall be cancelled or the price shall be diminished according to the kind of defects, aud the seller shall be liable to damages towards the buyer by the following rules.
Art. 67. Any kind of defect in the thing sold, is not a ground for the action of redhibition; such defects alone are considered as render the thing absolutely unfit for the purpose for which it was intended in commerce, or such as so far diminish its utility or render it so inconvenient that it is presumable that if these defects had been known to the buyer, he would not have bought at all, or would have bought at a reduced price.
Art. 68. Although the defects of the thing sold were unknown to the seller, he will nevertheless be responsible, if these defects are of a hidden nature, and the seller may, in this case, have the sale cancelled or have the price lessened, unless that the seller has stipulated that he should be under no kind of warranty.
Art. 69. The seller is not accountable for the apparent defects or vices which the buyer could have seen himself, as for instance, if a horse has his eyes put out; the buyer cannot complain of a defect of which he is ignorant only through his own fault, any more than of those that the seller may have declared to him.
Art. 70. In the cases of the above articles 67 & 68, the buyer has the choice either to return the thing and have the price restored to him, or to keep possession of the same and have such part of the price as shall be estimated by able men, refunded to him.
Art. 71. If the seller was acquainted with the defects of the thing, he is liable to all damages towards the buyer, besides the restitution of the price he may have received.
Art. 72. If the seller was ignorant of the defects of the thing, he shall only be obliged to the restitution of the price and to make reimbursement to the buyer of the costs occasioned by the sale.
Art. 73. If the defective thing has perished through its bad quality the loss is for the seller who will be bound towards the buyer for the restitution of the price with damages as is explained in the two preceding articles.
But the loss proceeding from an unforeseen accident, shall be for the buyer.
Art. 74. The action of redhibition does not take place in sales made by an authority of justice.
Art. 75. Whether this action has for its object the cancelling of the sale or a mere reduction of the price, it ought to be instituted within six months from the date of the sale at the farthest, or from the time that the defects or vices have been discovered; provided that in this latter case, not more than one year have elapsed from the time of the sale, and after that term the buyer shall not be admitted to said action.
Art. 76. It is besides necessary that the buyer prove in a satisfactory manner that the defect of which he complains existed at the time of the sale or anterior to that time.
If the defect appears immediately after the sale, or within the three following days, it shall be presumed that said defect existed before the sale or at the time it was made.
Art. 77. The defects or vices which generally give rise to the action of redhibition against the sale of horses and mules are the following, to wit: short wind, glanders, foundering and blindness, and other defects of that kind according to circumstances and the particular usages of this territory.
Art. 78. The redhibitory defects concerning slaves are divided into two classes, to wit: the vices of the disposition or temper, and the defects of the body.
Art. 79. The redhibitory vices and defects inherent in the disposition of slaves shall hereafter be limited to cases where it is proved that the slave has been guilty of some capital crime, or that he is addicted to robbery, or in the habit of running away.
Art. 80. The redhibitory defects owing to the sickness or infirmities of slaves consist principally in the three following diseases, to wit:
And the Epilepsy.
With regard to other ailments or infirmities with which slaves may be attacked, they form or constitute redhibitory defects only when they are incurable by their nature, so that the slave subject thereto is absolutely unfit for the service for which he is destined, or that his services are so inconvenient, difficult and interrupted, that it is to be presumed the buyer would not have bought him at all, if he had been acquainted with the defect, or that he would not have given so high a price, had he known that the said slave was subject to that sickness or infirmity.
But if the said sickness or infirmity is, by its nature, curable, whatever expences, time or care the cure may require, such defect cannot be considered as redhibitory, unless it should be proved that the seller was acquainted with said defect, before the sale or at the time it was made.
Art. 81. When the seller has declared that the thing sold by him, besides being free from the defects against which he is naturally to warrant it, had some quality which rendered the said thing better or more valuable and it is discovered that that quality is wanting, or that instead of it, the thing has the opposite defects or vices, the buyer shall be well founded to claim, according to the circumstances, either the cancelling of the sale or the diminution of the price, or even damages against the seller.
In this case, it will be necessary to judge of the effect that the declaration of the seller may have produced on the buyer in determining him to purchase, from the importance more or less of the qualities which may have been announced; from the knowledge that the said buyer could or ought to have had of the falseness or exaggeration of that declaration, and above all it must be considered whether these said qualities have been made a condition, without which the sale would not have taken place at all, or at least not for the same price.
|< Previous | Next >||© Manuscript notes copyright 1968 by Louis V. de la Vergne.|