STOP SEEING INTRUSIVE ADS, & HAVE PREMIUM FEATURES? Stop seeing intrusive ads and have a smoother reading experience, once you sign up on Judicial Poetry. Sign up now!

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

It is settled law that in an action for breach of contract in which claim for specific performance is made, there must be a valid, solid and existing and enforceable contract. The contract and the terms must be unequivocal and not based on the realm of conjecture. Similarly, the parties to the contract must have understood one another that they were entering a binding contract. Also, a party seeking to enforce a contract must show that all the conditions precedent have been fulfilled and that he has either performed, or is ready to perform all the terms which ought to have been performed by him. Again, where time is of essence or a condition precedent expressly or impliedly stated, and he is guilty of delay in performing his own part of the agreement, then such delay could count against him and might bar his claim for specific performance.

– Sanusi JCA. Enejo v. Nasir (2006)

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

specific performance

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE DISTINGUISHED FROM DAMAGES

To sue for specific performance is to assume that a contract is still subsisting and therefore to insist that it should be performed. That will mean that the plaintiff will not want it repudiated unless for any other reason the court was unable to aid him to enforce specific performance of it. He may then fall back for remedy at common law for damages. Specific performance is a discretionary remedy. This does not mean that it will be granted or withheld arbitrarily; the discretion is a judicial discretion and is exercised on well settled principles. It means that in an action for the specific performance of a contract of the class usually enforced, the court may take into account circumstances which could not be taken into account in an action for damages for breach of contract, such as the conduct of the plaintiff, or the hardship which an order for specific performance will inflict on the defendant.

– Ba’Aba JCA. Enejo v. Nasir (2006)

Was this dictum helpful?

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE WILL NOT BE ORDERED WHERE DAMAGES WILL BE ADEQUATE

Paye v. Gaji (1996) 5 NWLR (Pt. 450) page 589 at page 605, it was held thus:- “It is settled law that specific performance being an equitable remedy should not be ordered where damages will be adequate to meet the justice of the case”.

Was this dictum helpful?

EQUITABLE MORTGAGE TO CREATE A LEGAL MORTGAGE CAN SUE IN SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

The equitable mortgage by agreement to create a legal mortgage, therefore, entitles the equitable mortgagee to something more than a mere right to payment out of the property or premises mortgaged; under the general principles, his remedies correspond as nearly as possible with those of the legal mortgagee. Because equity regards that as done which ought to be done the equitable mortgagee, by agreement to create a legal mortgage, can enforce the execution of a legal mortgage by suing in equity for specific performance; if successful he obtains a legal term of years and can then pursue all the statutory remedies open to a legal mortgagee.

– Idigbe JSC. Ogundiani v. Araba (1978)

Was this dictum helpful?

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT OF SERVICE

The general rule is that the court will not grant specific performance of a contract of service. It therefore follows that a declaration to the effect that a contract of service still subsists is rarely made unless there are special circumstances to warrant making such a declaration. For example, where the contract of service has a legal or statutory flavour thus putting it over and above the ordinary master and servant relationship or where a special legal status such as a tenure of public office is attached to the contract of employment, in these circumstances, a court may use its discretion to declare that a contract of service still subsists. See: Olaniyan v. University of Lagos (2001) FWLR (Pt. 56) 808, (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 9) 559; Ewarami v. African Continental Bank Ltd. (1978) 4 SC 99 and Shitta-Bey v. Federal Public Service Commission (1981) 1 SC 40. –

Muhammad JCA. Osumah v. EBS (2004)

Was this dictum helpful?

THERE MUST BE PART PERFORMANCE TO WARRANT SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

On the issue of whether the appellant established sufficient acts of part performance to support and order for specific performance, it is the view of the court below that there had been no part performance to warrant a specific performance. I have myself considered all the evidence led before the court but can find no reason to fault this finding. At all events, whether or not part performance was established by the appellant in this case cannot now be regarded as any matter of great moment. This is because of my finding that there can be no specific performance of an agreement for a lease such as Exhibit A when the parties had not reached a consensus ad idem on vital issues such as the commencement date. The covenant, rent and mode of determination of the lease among others.

– Iguh JSC. Nlewedim v. Uduma (1995)

Was this dictum helpful?

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE REQUIRES EXACT PERFORMANCE OF A CONTRACT

Specific performance is the remedy of requiring exact performance of a contract in the specific form in which it was made or according to the precise terms agreed upon. It is the actual accomplishment of a contract by a party bound to fulfill it.

— A. Fabiyi, J.S.C. Ibekwe v. Nwosu (2011) – SC.108/2006

Was this dictum helpful?

No more related dictum to show.