case AWBRY versus keen eoden die Lord chancellor Eq can ab pl S c a agree with  b to purchase a copyhold for two life pay in part and be to pay the remainder  in three month and then to name his life and take up his copy a court be hold  the three month expire and the life not name nor the copy take up and b die  sudden and the manor come to one who be not bind by this agreement the  executor of b decree to repay the pound the plaintiff be tenant to Mr thin and  contract with his steward or bailiff for a copyhold estate for two life he pay  pound down and be to pay the residue on the take up of his copy which he be to  do in three month and then to name his two life a court be hold accord the  three month expire and the plaintiff neglect to name his two life and take up  his copy and before any thing further be do Mr thin die sudden be murder upon  who death the manor come to the Lord Weymouth by virtue of a remainder limit  in a settlement so that he be not bind by this agreement the plaintiff bill be  to compel the defendant Mr thin executor to refund which be decree accord  although it be insist that it be the plaintiff own laches that he have not the  estate it seem clear that in the performance of a contract time be material  Harrington v Wheeler Ves Lloyd v Collett bro Ch Rep but the judgement better  report in note to Harrington v Wheeler ub sup yet it appear the court in its  determination in case of laches must be govern by circumstance as to the  materiality of time with reference to the performance of a contract ibidem  vide also pink v Curteis bro Ch Rep forest v Elwes Ves and case cite by Mr  sander in his note on Gibson v Patterson atk which be say to be misreport by  Lord Loughborough chancellor in note to Harrington v Wheeler ub sup the  principal case however do not turn upon the materiality of time in question of  specific performance such a performance have here become impossible and the  only question be whether the plaintiff shall be relieve against the effect of  his own laches so as to throw the loss occasion by the lapse of time upon the  defendant perhaps such a case will now be consider as fall within the rule  that the purchaser shall receive the benefit and must stand to the loss  occasion by casualty occur between the agreement for a purchase and the  execution of the conveyance as to which see white v nut p wms and the case  collect in the note there that Edit particular pain v Mellor Ves Vernon  chancery case er p