The owner of a rare manuscript and a collector entered into a written agreement for the sale of the manuscript at a price of $7,500, which was to be paid upon delivery of the manuscript on a specific day. When the owner tendered the manuscript on the specified date, the collector refused to accept it or to pay for it. The owner tried in good faith, by commercially reasonable means, to sell the manuscript, but he was unsuccessful. He subsequently brought suit against the collector for specific performance of the contract. For whom should the court rule?

Question

Jesse Snow

Business

17 February, 01:53

The owner of a rare manuscript and a collector entered into a written agreement for the sale of the manuscript at a price of $7,500, which was to be paid upon delivery of the manuscript on a specific day. When the owner tendered the manuscript on the specified date, the collector refused to accept it or to pay for it. The owner tried in good faith, by commercially reasonable means, to sell the manuscript, but he was unsuccessful. He subsequently brought suit against the collector for specific performance of the contract. For whom should the court rule?

+3

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Trenton · Answer 1

Answer: The court should rule in favor of the collector, because in this case the restitution are an competent rectification for the individual.

In broad terms, particular performance is not available as a rectification for breach of a agreement when restitution are an adequate rectification for the non breaching organization.