Specific performance is reallly only a remedy for a buyer - when a seller won't sell and transfer the property to the buyer.
Although it states that the Seller may demand specific performance - they usually don't.
The reason they don't is - that the buyer can usually thwart the loan with the lender under the circumstances and then they are in litigation for nothing.The defn. of specific performance
- is an order of a court which requires a party to perform a specific act, usually what is stated in a contract. It is an alternative to awarding damages, and is classed as an equitable remedy commonly used in the form of injunctive relief concerning confidential information or real property
. While specific performance
can be in the form of any type of forced action, it is usually used to complete a previously established transaction, thus being the most effective remedy in protecting the expectation interest of the innocent party to a contract. It is usually the opposite of a prohibitory injunction
but there are mandatory injunctions which have a similar effect to specific performance.
In practice, specific performance
is most often used as a remedy in transactions regarding land, such as in the sale of land where the vendor (the seller) refuses to convey title. The reason being that land is unique and that there is not another legal remedy available to put the non-breaching party in the same position had the contract been performed. [Wikipedia]
So, specific performance is rarely granted by the court to the Seller.
I would not worry about the Seller pursuing specific performance - that's not going to happen in reality.
Kindly do not forget to positively rate my answers so I can be compensated for assisting you this evening.
If you have any questions, about this or anything else, please ask for me, Law Pro, directly in the question and I will try to assist you as best I can.
For example, you would state, "This question is for Law Pro . . . (then on with your question).