Agreements to Specifically Perform Contractual Obligations

(2012) 29 Journal of Contract Law 155

UWA Faculty of Law Research Paper

29 Pages Posted: 17 Dec 2013

See all articles by Robyn Carroll

Robyn Carroll

University of Western Australia

Date Written: 2012

Abstract

Can party agreements for specific performance or injunction or agreements that damages will not be an adequate remedy for breach of contract serve any purpose other than delusion or wishful thinking? Even when they are included as a term of a contract, remedial preference in the face of breach and commercial pragmatism coupled with orthodox legal advice is likely to weigh heavily against party reliance on these terms. This article examines what legal purpose, if any, is served by parties expressly stipulating for specific performance of their contractual obligations, including by injunction. While acknowledging that party agreements of this nature cannot oust or bind the exercise of judicial discretion, it argues that both theoretical and practical considerations indicate that these terms should be a significant factor in the decision whether or not to order specific performance or to grant an injunction for breach of contract.

Suggested Citation

Carroll, Robyn, Agreements to Specifically Perform Contractual Obligations (2012). (2012) 29 Journal of Contract Law 155 , UWA Faculty of Law Research Paper , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2357873

Robyn Carroll (Contact Author)

University of Western Australia ( email )

M253
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, Western Australia 6009
Australia

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
83
Abstract Views
561
Rank
539,187
PlumX Metrics