According Rotteinstein Law Group (RLG) (n.d.), a specific performance is a court order that authorizes a party that breaches a contract to perform certain acts. In addition, a court orders a specific performance when it perceives that damages will inadequately compensate the plaintiff (Kane, n.d.). Just like an injunction, a specific performance is not ordered in every civil law case (RLG, n.d.). This essay not only discuses the elements of Specific Performance but also analyzes whether or not scenarios provided are covered under the doctrine of Specific Performance.
It is worth noting that a court uses its own discretion to award a specific performance (Kane, n.d). Therefore, some cases qualify for specific performance while others do not. Instances where specific performance remedy applies include suits where unique goods, personalities and land are involved (Kane, n.d.). On the other hand, specific performance cannot be granted in cases where it impossible to order it, the plaintiff fails to honor part of the bargain, the contract can be terminated and supervision of the defendant is required (RLG, n.d.).
In the first Scenario, Tarrington enters in to contract with Rainier to sell her house. Afterwards, on finding another suitable buyer, she refuses to sell the house to Rainier. Houses are built on lands, therefore, contracts breaches relating to their sale take the same dimensions as land. While haggling over the price of a house, buyers and sellers generally consider the unique features of a land. This means that contracts breaches relating to the sale of houses can only be settled adequately through specific performance (Kane n.d.).
In the second case, Marita refuses to perform after she contracts, for a month, with Horace’s nightclub. This scenario can also be covered under the doctrine of specific performance because personalities have unique capabilities (Kane, n.d.). People are gifted differently and, therefore, cannot be substituted for others (Kane, n.d.). According to Tufal (n.d.), a court cannot force an actress to act for a plaintiff. However, it can impose an injunction to persuade her to honor a contract by preventing her to perform elsewhere (Tufal, n.d.).
The third Scenario features Juan who enters in to a contract to buy a rare coin from Edmund. This is possible, at that moment, because Edmund decides to do away with his coin collection. However, Edmund chooses to keep his coins. In this case, the court may revert to specific performance and order Edmund to turn over the coin to Juan.This is because the coin is a rare commodity since replacing it with another will not be adequate to compensate Juan.
Lastly, Cary enters in to a contract to sell his 4% share holding in Astro Computer Corp to DeValle. He however, refuses to reassign the shares to him. According to the Blanchard (1997), specific performance is not available unless the damages adequately compensate a plaintiff. However, in this scenario, Devalle can be compensated adequately with money. Therefore, the court cannot order a specific performance by Cary to hand over the shares to him.
In conclusion, specific performance does not apply to all cases involving contracts. Kane (n.d.) reiterates that it is only granted in civil laws suits where damages inadequately compensate the plaintiff. These civil law suits mostly involve rare goods, personalities and land.
References
Rotteinstein Law Group LLP. (n.d). What is “specific performance”? Web.
Blanchard, J. T. (1997). California remedies: commentary, materials and problems (3rd ed.). Web.
Kane, S. ( n.d). Specific performance. Web.
Tufal, A. (n.d.). Cases on equitable remedies. Web.