Louisiana Senate Bill SCR45

Louisiana 2015 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/20/15
• Refer: 4/21/15
• Report Pass: 5/26/15
• Passed: 5/27/15
• Engrossed: 5/27/15
• Refer: 5/28/15

Caption

Requests the Louisiana State Law Institute to study and make recommendations regarding Civil Code Article 2628 and contracts predating such article that contain no specified term for an option or right of first refusal.

Impact

The proposed study aims to evaluate the existing legal framework regarding contracts that lack specific terms for options or rights of first refusal. If the Louisiana State Law Institute finds that revisions are necessary, it will prepare recommended changes to the law in a legislative format for consideration by the state legislature. The study could lead to enhanced legal certainty concerning real estate transactions and contribute to the streamlining of property sales and negotiations in the state.

Summary

SCR45 is a Senate Concurrent Resolution that requests the Louisiana State Law Institute to conduct a study on Civil Code Article 2628. This article concerns the terms under which options or rights of first refusal can be granted in contracts related to immoveable property. The bill arises from the need to address ambiguities surrounding contracts predating 1993, when Article 2628 was first enacted, particularly those that do not specify a duration for these options or rights. The resolution emphasizes the need for clarity in applying the law to older agreements, which may result in legal complications and confusion in transactions.

Sentiment

General sentiment around SCR45 is positive, as it seeks to resolve confusion surrounding existing legal provisions. Supporters view the bill as a proactive measure to rectify potential flaws in the law, which could hinder property transactions and create legal disputes. A collaborative approach to law refinement is often favorably received among lawmakers who understand the complexity of real estate transactions.

Contention

While no major points of contention emerged during the legislative process, concerns remain regarding the potential implications of changes to Article 2628 on existing contracts. Specifically, stakeholders may debate the extent to which new recommendations could affect the rights of parties under older agreements that could be deemed valid based on the pre-1993 statutes. The resolution indicates an intent to approach any legal amendments thoughtfully, addressing concerns about impairing established contractual rights.