Specific enforcement is equitable relief when a court makes an order requiring a party to perform a specific act, such as full performance of the contract. It is usually available when selling land, but is usually not available if damage is a suitable alternative. A particular service is almost never available in personal services contracts, although performance can also be assured by the threat of lawsuits. SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE, corrective actions. The actual performance of a contract by the party who is required to perform it. 2.De many contracts are entered into by the parties to do certain things, and then the contracting parties neglect or refuse to fulfill their obligations. In such cases, the aggrieved party usually has a remedy and can claim damages for breach of contract; In many cases, however, seeking damages is an incompetent remedy, and the party seeks to restore some performance of the agreement. 3. It is a general rule that the courts of equity have jurisdiction over the particular performance of a contract where the courts do not have an adequate remedy; and it does not matter whether the object relates to immovable property or personal property.

1 crazy. Cpl. Pr. 295; 2 History of equation § 717; 1 Sim & Stu. 607; 1 p. Wms. 570; 1 Sch. & Lef. 553; 1 vern. 159. 4.

However, the rule is limited to cases where the courts cannot provide an adequate remedy. 2 History of eq. § 718; Eden on Inj. Cap. 3, p. 27. See generally 2 History of equation chap. 18, §§ 712 to 792; 1 ves. Jr. 96, 148, 184, 211, 495; 2 Supp.

to Ves. Jr. 65, 164; Fonb. Gl. b. 1, c. 1, p. 5; Sugd. Sell. 145. The contracting parties may include in the contract a specific performance clause in order to protect their interests in the event of a breach by one of the parties, in particular where the award of a cash reward may be considered insufficient.

Any person who has acted unfairly or in bad faith in the case in which he or she seeks redress shall be denied a fair remedy, regardless of any improper conduct on the part of the defendant. Misconduct need not be such that it can be punished as a criminal offence or warrant prosecution. Any intentional act related to the cause of action that violates the standards of fairness and justice is sufficient to prohibit the award of equitable relief. The Giants accepted from Flowers what it called a binding contract, but agreed to present to the public that there was no contract to deceive others who had a substantial interest in the case. If there had been a simple performance of the contract, followed by its submission to the Commissioner, none of these legal problems would have existed. The Giants created the situation through their sneaky behavior and therefore had no right to be exonerated by a fair court. The court refused to actually perform the contract. Civil courts will order a specific benefit in cases where financial compensation may not be the cheapest remedy. The time limit applies in particular to cases of breach of contract.

In these cases, the onus is on the claimant to prove that he or she is not “cured” by the financial damage alone. Instead, the court will order the defendant to do what he promised in the contract. These cases are unusual because monetary damages fairly satisfy the plaintiff`s case in most cases. In other words, a court may order specific performance in the form of replevin (release of actual goods) as a remedy in a contractual dispute if pecuniary damages are not sufficient. When the Giants tried to sue Flowers for certain accomplishments, because he was a unique asset and had made a deal, the fact that the professional team was trying to circumvent college league rules meant they didn`t have clean hands. Therefore, a certain benefit was denied by the court. The court may require that no financial damage be available or, more likely, that it be difficult to calculate the actual amount of the damage before ordering a particular benefit or other equitable form of compensation. As we have already mentioned, the specific benefit is a kind of equitable compensation.

Compensation is an action ordered by the court, not a sum of money. Fair compensation is often provided when financial compensation is not adequate. Monetary compensation is a kind of legal remedy. Typically, some performance disputes are more complicated than the example above. A recent example of this is the contract between Elon Musk and Twitter for Musk to buy the social media platform for $44 billion. Musk wants to pull out of the deal, and Twitter has threatened to sue him to enforce the specific performance clause that both sides have signed.