Explanation of Article 336
The article clarifies the ruling on partial eviction warranty; this occurs when it becomes apparent that a part of the sold item, whether undivided or specified, is owned by another party, or when the sold item or a part of it is burdened with a real right such as usufruct, easement, or mortgage, or with a personal right such as a lease contract. In the case of partial eviction, there are two scenarios:
The first scenario: The eviction causes a defect in the remaining part of the sold item, reducing its value or utility according to the intended purpose, as indicated in the contract or as apparent from the nature of the item or the purpose for which it was prepared. It is not necessary for this scenario to occur that the evicted part is the majority; the eviction may be in a small part of the sold item, but it results in the loss of the intended benefit for which the buyer concluded the contract, and had they known of its loss, they would not have completed the contract. For example, a few meters of land are evicted, which in the contract was intended for building a school, leading to a reduction below the legally required area, and similar cases. In this scenario, the buyer has two options:
A- Request the annulment of the sale and the refund of the price, following the rules of annulment for defects; they can also request compensation for the damage caused by the annulment. The court may reject the annulment request if the defect caused is of little importance. If the buyer chooses annulment, they cannot claim the eviction warranty for the evicted part, as the contract's effects, including the warranty against disturbance and eviction, are nullified upon annulment.
B- Retain the sold item and request the execution of the contract, which allows them to claim the eviction warranty for the evicted part from the seller. The provisions of the eviction warranty outlined in this system apply, and the compensation elements are the same as those stated in Article (335) for total eviction, except that the compensation is only for the evicted part, not the entire sold item. For example, they cannot reclaim from the price except what corresponds to the evicted part of the sold item, and so on.
Among the damages for which the seller must compensate, in application of this article, is the reduction in value of the non-evicted part of the sold item due to the defect. The seller is liable for the price difference in that part due to the defect, as will be explained in Article (33).
The second scenario: The eviction does not cause a defect in the remaining part of the sold item, so it does not reduce its value or utility; for example, when the sold item is divisible, such as multiple plots of land, and some are evicted without causing a defect in the rest. In this case, the buyer can only claim the eviction warranty for the evicted part and cannot request annulment.
Related To
Article 336
If ownership of part of the sold item is established to a third party and such ownership adversely affects the remaining part, the buyer may request termination of the sale. However, if the buyer decides to retain the sold item or if the remaining part is not adversely affected by the establishment of ownership, the buyer's right of recourse under the warranty of title shall be limited to the part to which ownership is established.