Is it fair for, Mr Conor
14 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
by Oracle » Sun Jan 23, 2011 7:16 am
I think we, here on CF, warned him he would lose this case because it somehow came out that Conor had not paid the builder subsequent, due installments and so he himself would have effectively broken the contract. Seems the courts agreed
-
Oracle - Leading Contributor
- Posts: 23507
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
- Location: Anywhere but...
by Milo » Sun Jan 23, 2011 7:39 am
No its not fair 
Now the Appeal has to go to the Supreme Court and that is more time and more money, but of course will be done and IF they uphold then on to the EU and the ECHR.
The judge accepted that Conor and Michaela had entered in to a contract to buy a house from Karayiannas, she accepted that Conor had had a contract stamped and lodged at the land registry office for "specific performance", she accepted the fact that, in law, Conor then became the "beneficial owner" with all the protection that goes along with this term, I.E. that the only one who could sell the house would be Conor, she even pointed out that Karayiannas use this very fact on their website to allay the fears of potential buyers. She accepted that the only person who could cancel the contract would be Conor, in negotiation with the developer, she likened the developer at that stage, although in law he is the legal owner, he becomes " the custodian of the best interests of the buyer and beneficial owner".
She accepted evidence from a representative of the land registry office who stated that Conor's contract was indeed stamped and registered there for specific performance. She accepted evidence that Conor had made staged payments as required by the contract until, mysteriously, one payment was rejected by the developer, she accepted that numerous attempts by Conor to contact the developer to find out what was happening were ignored and never answered. She accepted that the developer then sold the house to a third party after supposedly cancelling the contract, something that she had just said could only be done by Conor, in consultation.........................or by a court order, this had not happened.
She accepted all of the above, then found against him.
As it was a Prima Facie case after prosecuting evidence the judge rules whether or not there was criminal activity and a case to answer by the accused. They proved that their money is in their bank, the contract is in the land registry and someone else is in the house. A contract in the lands registry means you are the beneficial owner and case law from Cyprus supports this.
After the prima facia ruling it was for the accused to put up their defence. All three accused remained silent and chose neither to give evidence nor to make a statement. They called one witness a lawyer who presented two letters to the court. They are the ones that say they Karayiannas terminate the contract “will never ever deliver to you the house” and that they will keep the money. You would think such letters would go against them. But not in Cyprus, not in the lower “district” courts.
At submission Conors lawyer put forward case law that shows that if you have a prima facia decision against the accused and the accused offers no explanation or contradiction then the natural course of justice would be a guilty verdict.
Effectively the judge over ruled her own decision!! There was always a chance they would have to appeal the sentence but never the verdict.
So there you have it, it is legal in this country for a developer to take your money, cancel your contract, sell the house to someone else at a profit and keep your money.........because they told you they were going to do it, incredible!
Now the Appeal has to go to the Supreme Court and that is more time and more money, but of course will be done and IF they uphold then on to the EU and the ECHR.
The judge accepted that Conor and Michaela had entered in to a contract to buy a house from Karayiannas, she accepted that Conor had had a contract stamped and lodged at the land registry office for "specific performance", she accepted the fact that, in law, Conor then became the "beneficial owner" with all the protection that goes along with this term, I.E. that the only one who could sell the house would be Conor, she even pointed out that Karayiannas use this very fact on their website to allay the fears of potential buyers. She accepted that the only person who could cancel the contract would be Conor, in negotiation with the developer, she likened the developer at that stage, although in law he is the legal owner, he becomes " the custodian of the best interests of the buyer and beneficial owner".
She accepted evidence from a representative of the land registry office who stated that Conor's contract was indeed stamped and registered there for specific performance. She accepted evidence that Conor had made staged payments as required by the contract until, mysteriously, one payment was rejected by the developer, she accepted that numerous attempts by Conor to contact the developer to find out what was happening were ignored and never answered. She accepted that the developer then sold the house to a third party after supposedly cancelling the contract, something that she had just said could only be done by Conor, in consultation.........................or by a court order, this had not happened.
She accepted all of the above, then found against him.
As it was a Prima Facie case after prosecuting evidence the judge rules whether or not there was criminal activity and a case to answer by the accused. They proved that their money is in their bank, the contract is in the land registry and someone else is in the house. A contract in the lands registry means you are the beneficial owner and case law from Cyprus supports this.
After the prima facia ruling it was for the accused to put up their defence. All three accused remained silent and chose neither to give evidence nor to make a statement. They called one witness a lawyer who presented two letters to the court. They are the ones that say they Karayiannas terminate the contract “will never ever deliver to you the house” and that they will keep the money. You would think such letters would go against them. But not in Cyprus, not in the lower “district” courts.
At submission Conors lawyer put forward case law that shows that if you have a prima facia decision against the accused and the accused offers no explanation or contradiction then the natural course of justice would be a guilty verdict.
Effectively the judge over ruled her own decision!! There was always a chance they would have to appeal the sentence but never the verdict.
So there you have it, it is legal in this country for a developer to take your money, cancel your contract, sell the house to someone else at a profit and keep your money.........because they told you they were going to do it, incredible!
-
Milo - Contributor
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 8:38 am
by Paphitis » Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:54 am
Milo wrote:No its not fair
Oh there there.
I will offer you a shoulder to cry on....
So there you have it, it is legal in this country for a developer to take your money, cancel your contract, sell the house to someone else at a profit and keep your money.........because they told you they were going to do it, incredible!
Negative!
All of the above is illegal in the RoC and the courts would've delivered their verdict based on the facts and in accordance with RoC Law!
Conor should've accepted the refund and out of court settlement that was offered.... Stupid Man!!!!
-
Paphitis - Leading Contributor
- Posts: 32303
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm
Re: Is it fair for, Mr Conor
by repulsewarrior » Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:59 am
cyprus33054.html?hilit=O%E2%80%99Dwyer
...it is in the news again,
https://cyprus-mail.com/2020/01/21/his- ... n-in-rome/
n.b. this is a reader's comment, there is a link to the article in question.
adding this,
cyprus32068-210.html?hilit=O%E2%80%99Dwyer
...it is in the news again,
https://cyprus-mail.com/2020/01/21/his- ... n-in-rome/
n.b. this is a reader's comment, there is a link to the article in question.
adding this,
cyprus32068-210.html?hilit=O%E2%80%99Dwyer
-
repulsewarrior - Leading Contributor
- Posts: 14254
- Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 2:13 am
- Location: homeless in Canada
14 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
© 2002 - 2015 Cyprus-Forum.com
