(x) Above, p. 1005.

The cases, in which the vendor or purchaser is entitled to obtain an order for specific performance of the contract with compensation for some error of description, have been already discussed in connection with the subject of the completion of the contract (c).

Specific performance with compensation .

(y) Above, p. 69.

(s) Above, pp. 69, n. (e), 96,6, 971.

(a) See Lyde v. Yarborouyh, John. 70; Phillipson v. Gibbon, L. R. 6 Ch. 428, 434.

{b) Above, pp. 32, 69, 70, 157 - 1.59, 160, 165 - 16S, 171, 172, 685, 687, G93, 743.

If either party to a sale of land fail to comply with an order of the Court that he shall perforin the contract specifically (d), the other may at his election adopt one of two courses (e). First, he may apply to the Court to enforce the judgment. That is to say, he may obtain an order fixing a time and place for conveyance and payment of the purchase money, or fixing a time within which the judgment for specific performance is to be obeyed, and in default of compliance with this order he may proceed against the disobedient party for contempt (f). And if the party in default be the vendor, the purchaser may obtain a conveyance of the land to himself by means of a vesting order or an order appointing a person to convey under the Trustee Act, 1893 (g). Secondly, in case of failure to comply within a reasonable time with a judgment for specific performance, or to comply with an order fixing a time for completion, the party not in default may obtain an order for the rescission of the contract (h). Besides these remedies, if the purchaser were the party in default, the vendor may apply to the Court to enforce his lien for the unpaid purchase money (i) and to obtain an order for a re-sale to realise the amount due thereon (k).

Failure to comply with a judgment for specific performance.

Proceedings to enforce the judgment.

Vesting order.

Order for rescission of the contract.

(c) Above, pp. 634 - 644.

(d) Above, p. 9S7.

(e) Fry, Sp. Perf. Sec. 11711173, 3rd ed.; Seton on Judgments, 2285, 6th ed.

(f) Seton on Judgments, 2285 - 2287, 6th ed.

(g) Stat. 56 & 57 Vict. c. 53, ss. 26 - 34; above, p. 469, n. (u); Seton on Judgments, 2287, 2288, 6th ed.; and see stat. 47 & 48 Vict. c. 61 s. 14.

(h) Above, pp. 948, 949, n. (m), 952, n. (f), 969, n. (d). This case appears to form an exception to the rule that an election once exercised to affirm or rescind a contract cannot afterwards be revoked (above, pp. 745, 896); for by obtaining judgment for specific performance of the agreement the party had previously affirmed it; above, pp. 947, 969; see Baker v. Williams, 62 L. J. Ch. 315. It is thought that the ground of this exception is that, if one party commit a contempt of Court in disobeying an order that he shall perform the contract specifically, this is such an absolute repudiation of his duty under the contract that it would be a hardship to oblige the other to carry out the agreement and not to allow him to recede from it. The writer has followed Sir Edward Fry's statement (above, n. (e)), that in the above-mentioned circumstances rescission may be claimed by either party Enforcing the vendor's lien.

The County Courts have jurisdiction in actions for the specific performance of any agreement for the sale or purchase of any property, where the purchase money does not exceed the sum of 500l. (l). It has been held that this jurisdiction exists where the contract is for the sale of an equity of redemption for a price not exceeding 500/., although the amount of the price, together with that of the charges on the property, exceed that sum (m).

Jurisdiction of County Courts in specific performance.