Specific Perfomance

I am mindful of the fact that Court has discretionary powers to grant specific performance. However, Court could always grant discretionary powers judicially and judiciously and certainly not arbitrarily. It must weigh the consequences and hardship on the defendant as well as the conduct of plaintiff before granting the order of specific performance. See MTN Nig. Telecommunications Ltd vs Wigatap Trade and Investment Ltd (2013) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1344) 276; Enejo vs SA (2008) All FWLR (Pt. 412) 1084; Olowo vs Building Stock Ltd (2010) 2 NWLR (Pt. 117) 310.

The plaintiff/respondent was seeking specific performance which is an equitable remedy. It is also discretionary. The trial Judge recongnised plaintiff's right but elected to award to him compensatory damages. The court below however was of the view that it would be unjust to take plaintiff/respondent's house form him and give him damages as compensation. The learned authors of SNELL'S Principle of Equity, 27th edition at page 575 paragraph 5 write:
"5. Specific performance a discretionary remedy.
Although the court will not order specific performance where damages would fully compensate the plaintiff, the converse of the position is not true. There are many cases in which the court will not grant specific performance even if the remedy in damages is insufficient; for specific performance is a discretionary remedy. This does not mean that it will be granted or withheld arbitrarily; the discretion is a judicial discretion, and is exercised on well-settled principles. It means that in an action for the specific performance of a contract of the class usually enforced, the court may take into account circumstances which could not be taken into account in an action for damages for breach of contract, such as the conduct of the plaintiff, or the hardship which an order for specific performance would inflict on the defendant."
I am satisfied that the court below was right in its decision.