Alan entered into a written contract for the purchase of a house owned by Joe.But as the time to move approached, Alan discovered that Joe was refusing to move out and refusing to transfer the property.Apparently a dissatisfied customer had driven through the showroom window of Joe's new car dealership causing him considerable expense.Joe could no longer afford to purchase the new luxury home in Langley to which he had intended to move.Which of the following is the appropriate remedy in these circumstances for Alan, who really wants the house?
A)Specific performance
B)Damages
C)Injunction
D)Rescission
E)No remedy

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Specific performance is a remedy that requires the breaching party to perform the terms of the contract. In this case, Alan could seek specific performance to require Joe to transfer the property as agreed in the contract. Since Alan really wants the house, this would be the best choice for him. Alternatively, he could seek damages for any losses he incurred as a result of Joe's breach. However, damages would not guarantee that he would get the house, whereas specific performance would. The other options, such as an injunction or rescission, may not be appropriate or feasible in these circumstances.

Alan Entered into a Written Contract for the Purchase of a House