The defendant says that the plaintiff was made whole by the repayment of the purchase price within several days of the breach and further, that the contract did not involve the purchase of a chattel that is unique. Accordingly, the plaintiff is not entitled to specific performance. Counsel relies on Semelhago v. Paramadevan, 1996 CanLII 209 (SCC), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 415.
"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.