- Specific performance is an option in contract law cases. With specific performance, the court will order the parties to fulfill their contract. This can be good in some cases, but usually money is a better remedy.
- If money can’t compensate well, specific performance is often best. For example, if a contract had called for the sale of a unique object.
- When money can compensate adequately, it’s a better remedy. In some cases, specific performance would be awkward. For example, if an employee had failed to work after accepting a position. Specific performance would force the employer to take on an employee they had sued, and it would force that same employee to work for the employer they just fought bitterly against. Better to get damages.
I think this passage is pretty straightforward. If you offer to sell me a rare painting and then refuse, I’d probably like to get the painting itself.
If you offer to paint my roof and then refuse, I’d probably rather just have some money to hire another roofing company. Having you do my roof, after suing you, would be awkward for all involved. Including the court, which is why judges prefer awarding money!
One possible caveat is that often people don’t have money, but they do have the ability to fulfill the disputed contract.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions