A seller and buyer enter into a valid written contract for the sale of a residential property. The contract sets the closing date as June 1. On May 31, the buyer notifies the seller that they need an extra week to secure financing and requests an extension for closing. The seller refuses and demands performance on June 1. If the buyer fails to close on June 1, which of the following is most important in determining whether the contract remains enforceable?
Whether the contract includes a clause stating that time is of the essence.
Whether the seller was justified in refusing the extension request based on the terms of the contract.
Whether the buyer gave adequate notice and effort to secure financing before the closing date.
Whether the buyer failed to meet the financing contingency established by the contract.
The enforceability of the contract hinges on whether the contract includes a clause or clear language indicating that time is of the essence. Without such a clause, closing dates are typically treated as flexible, and parties are allowed reasonable delays without breaching the agreement. Other answers are incorrect because they focus on subjective or ancillary issues, such as justification for the seller’s actions and the buyer's efforts or delays, which are secondary to the presence of a 'time of the essence' clause or equivalent language.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What does 'time is of the essence' mean in a contract?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are common consequences of failing to meet a closing date in a real estate contract?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How can parties clarify the importance of closing dates in their contracts?