Where the parties enter into a preliminary agreement to execute a land contract at some subsequent time,

21. Ogooshevitz v. Wangas, 203 Mich. 666; Anderson v. Kennedy, 51 Mich. 467.

22. Loveridge v. Schurtz, 111 Mich. 618.

23. Sec. 113, Post.

24. Sec. 114, Post.

25. Staces Chancery Practice, Sec. 626; Dragoo v. Dragoo, 50 Mich. 573; Chandler v. McKinney, 6 Mich. 322.

26. Colharin v. Knoch, 133 Mich 335.

27. Wayne v. Beeman, 211 Mich. 361. Where plaintiff, a shrewd business man did not inform elderly ladies that two of three owners could not transfer the property.

Lake Erie Land Co. v. Chylinski, 197 Mich. 214. Where a shrewd and irresponsible promoter secured a contract from people of foreign extraction which permitted of great delay in payments.

28. Slatkin v. Schuman, 210 Mich. 513.

29. See Sec. 114, Post.

the court may decree specific performance of such preliminary agreement,30 but before the purchaser seeks to invoke this remedy, he should examine carefully his preliminary agreement to ascertain whether or not same contains a sufficient description of the terms of the land contract to fully protect him. For instance, if the agreement is silent as to the date when possession of the real estate is to be given, while it would be possible, if the other terms were sufficient, for the purchaser to enforce specific performance of such preliminary agreement, he, nevertheless, could not obtain possession of the property until he had paid the purchase price in full, as the law presumes that the vendor is entitled to possession until the full purchase price shall have been paid, unless the contract specifies possession shall be given at an earlier date.31 Few preliminary agreements, to the considerable disadvantage of the vendor, contain clauses permitting forfeiture for the nonpayment of the purchase price, or for failure to pay taxes or special assessments, or contain any mention as to whose duty it will be to keep the premises insured, and in the absence of such provisions in the preliminary agreement, it is very doubtful if the vendor could insist that such clauses be embodied in the land contract itself. All of these considerations should be given due weight by the practitioner before invoking the remedy of specific performance.