In English law, specific performance is an equitable remedy compelling a party to fulfil their contractual obligations, typically used when monetary compensation (damages) would be inadequate.
Specific performance involves a court order mandating exact compliance with contract terms, particularly applied in cases involving unique or rare items, such as land or specific goods.
Courts generally avoid specific performance for personal services, ongoing supervision requirements, or vague and uncertain obligations.
Understanding specific performance helps parties recognise potential consequences of breach, encouraging contract compliance, especially where unique assets are involved.
Peter Beswick sold his coal merchant business to his nephew in exchange for weekly payments to himself during his lifetime and an annuity of £5 per week to his widow after his death. The nephew refused to pay the widow. The House of Lords held that the widow, as administratrix of her husband's estate, could obtain specific performance to enforce the annuity payments.
Argyll closed their Safeway supermarket in breach of a lease covenant requiring them to keep premises open for retail trade. CIS sought specific performance to compel continued trading. The House of Lords refused, holding that courts will not normally order specific performance requiring a defendant to carry on a business, as damages were the appropriate remedy.
Appellants sent a telegram asking if Facey would sell property and his lowest price. Facey replied with only the lowest price (£900). Appellants purported to accept. The Privy Council held no contract existed as stating a lowest price was not an offer to sell.
Wrench offered to sell his farm to Hyde for £1000. Hyde counter-offered £950, which Wrench rejected. Hyde then purported to accept the original £1000 offer. The court held no contract existed as the counter-offer had destroyed the original offer, establishing the counter-offer rule in contract law.
Opera singer Johanna Wagner contracted to perform exclusively at Her Majesty's Theatre for three months but then agreed to sing at a rival theatre. The Court granted an injunction preventing her from singing elsewhere, establishing that equity can enforce negative contractual stipulations even where specific performance of positive obligations is impossible.
The defendant granted the plaintiffs an option to purchase his house for £10,000, receiving £1 consideration. He later attempted to withdraw but the plaintiffs exercised the option. The Court of Appeal upheld specific performance, confirming that nominal consideration supports a valid irrevocable option, and the resulting contract was enforceable.
The Supreme Court held that Tesco could not use dismissal to remove “retained pay”, implying a term preventing termination where it would defeat a core contractual benefit promised as permanent.
September 22, 2026
National Case Law Archive
September 22, 2026
National Case Law Archive
September 22, 2026
National Case Law Archive