specific performance and injunctions Flashcards
damages inadequate
cohen v roche [1927] - court did not order specific performance
Johnson v Agnew [1979]
where specific performance is ordered but not complied with, damages was still available as an alternative remedy, and would be assessed on a common law basis at a date when remedy of specific performance was aborted.
Sky Petroleum v VIP Petroleum [1974]
injunction, under the circumstances, would be order of specific performance of the contract to sell, which is normally refused on the basis that damages would be sufficient.
however - in rare situation where d is only supplier and only method enabling them to continue business, injunction granted as damages no longer sufficient remedy.
restrictions for order of specific performance
severe hardship
‘he who comes to equity must come with clean hands’
certain kinds of contracts (personal services)
constant supervision of the court
severe hardship
Patel v Ali [1984] - in instances of sale of property/land, remedy of specific performance is often withheld on proof of special facts and courts is justified in refusing specific performance on the grounds of hardship.
‘he who comes to equity must come with clean hands’
Shell UK v Lostock Garages [1976] - relief by way of decree of specific performance will only be granted where equitable and just to do so.
certain kinds of contracts (personal services)
De Francesco v Barnum [1890] - if a beneficial contract is harsh or oppressing, the minor will not be bound.
constant supervision of the court
Co operative insurance society v argyll stores [1997] - clause in the agreement not specific enough to be capable of specific performance. defendant would likely suffer greater loss by being forced to perform the contract than the plaintiff would if the defendant did not carry out the contract as agreed. This would place the plaintiff in an unfair bargaining position
prohibitory injunction
metropolitan electric supply company v ginder [1901] - G was, restrained by an injunction from buying electricity from any other company
warner bros v nelson [1937]
The court found that the contract was not meant to force the defendant to specific performance but that an injunction would enforce the contract to perform and therefore specific performance was not an appropriate remedy.
araci v fallon [2011]
fallon under obligation to ride araci’s horse while under negative obligation to not ride any rival horse, however he decided to ride another horse. araci sought injunction to prevent him, and it was granted.
sunrise brokers llp v rodgers [2014]
court would not grant an injunction to enforce a prohibition on an employee from working for anyone other than the employer if that would produce the same result indirectly. The only relevant principle was that an injunction should not be granted where the effect would be to compel the employee to continue to work for the employer
luganda v service hotels [1969]
mandatory injunction could be granted to restore tenancy of the plaintiff in the room that he was locked out of by the defendants. that was unlawful.
damages were awarded in substitution for an injunction.
wrotham park estates co v parkside homes [1974]
jaggard v sawyer [1995]
