Where specific performance once was regarded as a presumptive remedy for a seller's substantive breach of a contract for the purchase and sale of real estate, it is now accepted that the purchaser seeking that remedy must prove that the property is unique to the extent that a substitute would not be readily available and that there is a fair, real, and substantial justification for the decree that is sought: Semelhago v. Pramadevan, 1996 CanLII 209 (SCC), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 415, 136 D.L.R. (4th) 1 ¶ 21-22. …
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.