P had contracted to sell their house to D for an amount exceeding P’s mortgage. However D failed to go through with the transaction, even after a court’s order of specific performance to do so. The bank then repossessed the houses and sold them for an amount less than the total of P’s mortgage. P sued D for the difference between the amount owed via the mortgage and the amount raised by the sale of the house. HL allowed P’s claim for the damages. It held that where a vendor elected for specific performance rather than damages the contract remained in force, but he could nevertheless later elect for damages if the specific performance was not complied with and this would terminate the contract.