Contractor v. Owner: Interruption of Prescription by Implied Contractual Renewal

A contractor sued the owner for payment based on an oral contract for services rendered, but the owner invoked the defense of prescription, arguing the claim was time-barred under the relevant statute of limitations. The Court of Cassation upheld the lower court's decision to dismiss the claim, reasoning that the uncontroverted factual finding by the lower court that the parties had implicitly renewed the contractual relationship through subsequent actions after the initial agreement was sufficient to interrupt the prescription period, thereby validating the claim for payment.