If someone breaks a contract, the other party can generally sue and win some form of damages. But for centuries, the law has considered land to be unique, so a lawsuit that involves a broken agreement for a sale of land will usually result in an order of specific performance.
Write an essay that answers the following questions:
- Is this ancient rule still reasonable? Why or why not? Use what you know about contract law to support your position.
- If someone backs out of an agreement to sell an acre of land, should he be ordered to turn over the land itself? Why not just require him to pay an appropriate number of dollars in damage?
- Should this rule apply to other types of contracts/how else could this contract type end?