A Case Summary of Patel v Ali [1984]

Case name & citation: Patel v Ali [1984] 1 All ER 978; [1984] Ch 283

Court: High Court
The learned Judge: Goulding J
Area of Law: Specific Performance

Table of Contents

What is the case about?

In Patel v Ali [1984], the High Court addressed the issue of specific performance in the context of a contract for the sale of a house.

Facts

Mr. and Mrs. Patel contracted to sell their house to Mr. Ali in 1979.
The completion of the sale was delayed due to Mr. Patel’s bankruptcy.
At the time of contracting, Mrs. Patel was healthy and had one child.
During the delay, Mrs. Patel developed bone cancer, resulting in the amputation of her leg. She also had two more children.
Mrs. Patel became heavily reliant on friends and neighbours for day-to-day activities.
Mr. Ali sought specific performance of the contract.

Legal Issue

Whether specific performance should be granted when the seller experiences severe hardship after the contract has been entered into.

Judgment in Patel v Ali

The High Court denied specific performance on the grounds that it would cause significant hardship to Mrs. Patel.

The court recognized that Mrs. Patel’s circumstances had drastically changed since the contract was made. Mrs. Patel’s reliance on her local support network and her medical condition would make it extremely difficult for her to move. Although Mr. Ali was not at fault for the delay or Mrs. Patel’s hardship, the court determined that enforcing specific performance would result in “hardship amounting to injustice.”

The court stated that even if the hardship was not caused by the plaintiff and is unrelated to the contract’s subject matter, specific performance could still be refused.

Conclusion (Patel v Ali)

The court allowed the appeal and decided that damages would be a more appropriate remedy rather than forcing Mrs. Patel to move out of her home under the circumstances. The court emphasized that even when a party of full capacity enters into a contract, the court can refuse specific performance if subsequent hardship, not caused by the plaintiff, would make enforcement unjust.

References:

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE:

A Case Summary of Walters v Morgan (1861)

MORE FROM CONTRACT LAW: