Where one party to a contract has been guilty of fraud, he cannot enforce the contract either at law or in equity unless it has been ratified after discovery of the facts by the other party.73 Such a contract, therefore, is one which neither at the outset nor subsequently is enforceable by both parties. There is neither mutuality of obligation74 nor mutuality of remedy in the sense in which those phrases are frequently and perhaps naturally understood, yet it cannot be doubted that the defrauded party may maintain a bill for the specific performance of a contract otherwise appropriate for equitable relief. Similarly where the defendant has been guilty of constructive fraud as where a trustee has contracted to buy property belonging to the trust75 the transaction cannot be enforced by him, but against him it shall stand. And though a prior voluntary settlement made by a vendor will preclude him from enforcing a subsequent contract to sell,76 the purchaser may have specific performance.77 Similarly a contract perhaps voidable at its inception and for some time thereafter because of the vendor's incomplete title78 may be specifically enforced by the vendor if he has acted in good faith, and at any time previous to decree is able to complete his title.79
69 8ee infra, Sec. 1437. 70 See infra, Sec. 1438. 71 See infra, Sec.1439. 72 Seee infra, 51435. 73See infra, Sec.Sec.1526 etseq.
74 See supra, Sec. 105. 75 Ex parte Lacey, 6 Ves. 625. 76 Smith v. Garland, 2 Meriv. 123. 77 Roeher v. Williams, L. R. 20 Eq. 210.