What is specific performance?
What it means and how to read it on a deal.
What it is
The target's right to ask a court to order the buyer to complete the deal, instead of only collecting a fee or damages.
Whether a court grants the order is still the court's decision.
An order to close
Specific performance is a court order to do what the agreement requires. In a merger, that usually means to close.
Say Woodgrove agreed to buy Litware for $50.00 a share. The closing conditions are met, but Woodgrove refuses to close.
Litware can ask a court to order Woodgrove to close. It's a remedy for when money alone wouldn't make up for the loss.
Most merger agreements say each side may ask a court for it. Whether a court grants it is still the court's decision.
Full or limited
Private equity deals often limit it. The two forms are:
- Full
- The target can ask a court to make the buyer close once the conditions are met.
- Limited
- The target can force the closing only if the buyer's debt financing is funded, or will fund at closing. If not, the agreement may limit the target to the reverse termination fee. It's also called specific performance lite.
One count looked at going-private deals, in which a buyer, often a private equity firm, takes a public company private.
In its 2024 count, 34 of 36 deals let the target seek specific performance. Of those, 85% were the limited kind. In its 2023 count, 45% were limited and 55% full.
An agreement may let the target pursue specific performance or the fee, but not collect both.
How courts have used it
Two Delaware cases went different ways:
- IBP v. Tyson Foods (2001)
- The Delaware Court of Chancery ordered the merger agreement specifically performed. Tyson then agreed to close, and the merger closed on September 28, 2001.
- Hexion v. Huntsman (2008)
- The court ordered the buyer to perform its other obligations, but not to close. The agreement didn't allow that remedy. Huntsman ended the agreement in December 2008.
Twitter and Elon Musk
Twitter's 2022 agreement with Elon Musk was the limited kind. It let Twitter force the closing only if the debt financing was funded, or would be at closing.
Twitter sued Musk for specific performance on July 12, 2022. A trial was set for October 17.
Musk agreed to close before the trial began, and the court paused the case. Then the deal closed on October 27, 2022, at the agreed $54.20 a share.
No court ordered Musk to close.
What it means for shareholders
Litware holders get their $50.00 a share only if the deal closes.
Specific performance is what can turn a reluctant buyer into a closed deal at the agreed price.
Without it, the target may be left with a fee or a claim for damages.
On Tracking Alpha
The checklist line Target can force the buyer to close reads Yes, Only in some cases or No.
Only in some cases typically means the limited kind: only once the buyer's debt financing is funded or ready to fund.
On the list, it's the second protection dot and a tag.
- Target can force the close
- Target can force the close in some cases
- Target can't force the close
- Specific performance not in the filings
Easily confused with
- Reverse termination fee
- A payment, not an order to close. In many private equity deals, the fee is all the target can get when the financing doesn't fund.
- Duty to litigate
- The buyer's promise to fight a regulator's suit against the deal. Specific performance is the target's remedy against the buyer.
Questions
Can a target force a buyer to close?
Sometimes. If the agreement allows specific performance and a court agrees, it can order the buyer to close. In many private equity deals, that's only once the debt financing is funded or ready to fund.
Did a court force Elon Musk to buy Twitter?
No. Twitter sued for specific performance in July 2022, but Musk agreed to close before the October trial. The deal closed on October 27, 2022, at $54.20 a share.
What is limited specific performance?
A version tied to the buyer's debt. The target can force the closing only if that financing is funded or ready to fund at closing. Among 36 going-private deals in 2024, 85% of those with it used the limited form.
Sources
- Houlihan Lokey, 2024 Going Private Transaction Study (May 2025)
- In re IBP, Inc. Shareholders Litigation, Delaware Court of Chancery (2002), opinion
- Tyson Foods, Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 29, 2001
- Hexion Specialty Chemicals v. Huntsman, Delaware Court of Chancery (2008), opinion
- Huntsman Corporation, Form 8-K on the settlement with Hexion and Apollo (December 2008)
- Twitter, Agreement and Plan of Merger with X Holdings, Form 8-K exhibit 2.1 (April 2022)
- Twitter vs. Musk: the complaint, Harvard Law School Forum (July 2022)
- Associated Press, Musk lawyers say Twitter refusing new $44B bid for company (October 6, 2022)
- Twitter, Form 8-K on the completion of the merger (October 27, 2022)
Tracking AlphaBy Jera Value · Reviewed