Early payment did not bar deposit-based rescission
The Supreme Court considered contractual terms and payment circumstances, rather than treating unilateral early payment alone as commencement of performance.
Updated Nov 12, 2026
Can payment before the balance date alone prevent deposit-based rescission?
What the judgment established
On 2024 / 1 / 4, the Supreme Court dismissed the buyer’s appeal in 2022da256624. It upheld the seller’s rescission, considering a mutual-agreement clause for advancing the balance date, a small unannounced early payment and the seller’s intent to return it.
Sources [1]
Contract and conduct, not just the calendar
A payment or balance date alone may not resolve cancellation rights. Contract terms and the actual course of performance matter together.
Sources [1]
Why it does not decide the caller’s rights
Civil Act Article 565 is subject to contrary agreement and commencement of performance. This seller-specific ruling does not establish the video caller’s right to cancel.
Sources
- Supreme Court judgment 2022da256624, 2024 / 1 / 4Accessed Nov 12, 2026
- Civil Act Article 565: earnest moneyAccessed Nov 12, 2026