Contract; remedies for breach; specific performance; discretionary nature of remedy; adequacy of damages.
Facts: Williamson operated a theatre in Melbourne and owned a confectionery shop next door to the theatre. Williamson leased this shop to Lukey for five years. As part of the deal Williamson granted Lukey an exclusive right to sell sweets in the theatre itself. Lukey exercised this right for three years. Then Williamson allowed another person to sell sweets in the theatre, claiming that it had not been agreed how long Lukey would have an exclusive right to do so. Lukey sued Williamson for breach of contract, asking for various remedies, including an order of specific performance of his exclusive right.
Issue: Would the court order specific performance of the exclusive right to sell sweets in the theatre?
Decision: Specific performance would not be ordered in these circumstances.
Reason: Reason: In contracts where both parties owe repeated duties of performance, one party will not be ordered to perform specifically if the performance they are owed in return cannot also be guaranteed without continued supervision by the court. The exclusive right to sell sweets in the theatre involved repeated acts by both parties and this would have required constant supervision. The courts cannot efficiently provide such supervision. Accordingly, specific performance was refused and Lukey had to be satisfied with a claim for damages for breach of contract.