Evaluate equitable contract remedies
Match the remedy to its purpose and explain why discretionary relief is not automatic after breach.
Exam scope and assessment notes
A Level · section 3.4.2. Original educational scenarios about the law of England and Wales, checked on 14 October 2026. Model answers are formative reasoning, not advice about a real dispute, Cambridge marks or predicted grades. Read the exact statute, case and exam-year source where a rule is disputed or changes. A larger annotated authority bank, full unseen papers and specialist law-teacher review remain outstanding.
Before you begin
- Read a short source carefully and separate its rule from the facts
- Explain which element a fact supports and what is still uncertain
Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.
Quick readiness check
What should a legal problem answer connect?
What you will learn
- Distinguish specific performance, restitution, rescission and injunction
- Evaluate adequacy of damages and limits on equitable relief
Select the actual remedy
Specific performance orders performance of an enforceable obligation and can be useful where damages do not adequately replace a unique interest, such as particular land. Specific restitution concerns return or delivery of identifiable property; it is not simply another name for every damages claim. Rescission unwinds a contract where a recognised ground such as a vitiating factor permits it, subject to bars.
Termination for repudiatory breach is not automatically rescission from the beginning. An injunction restrains or requires conduct as appropriate; a negative covenant may raise different issues from compelling personal service. Identify what the claimant wants and the legal basis for it before selecting the name.
Explain discretion and limits
Equitable remedies can be refused where damages are adequate, the order is impractical to supervise, personal service would be compelled, or hardship and other equitable considerations justify refusal. Delay, conduct, affirmation, restoration difficulties and third-party rights matter for the relevant remedy. The exact limits are not interchangeable for every kind of relief.
Evaluate the advantage of obtaining the promised unique performance against enforcement cost, practical supervision and fairness to others. A claimant cannot infer entitlement from the fact of breach alone or use an injunction to evade the law's reluctance to force personal work.
Sources for this lesson
Pause and explain
Does breach alone guarantee specific performance?
Worked example
A seller refuses to convey a particular plot under an enforceable contract. A buyer says specific performance is guaranteed because breach occurred. Evaluate.
Show the worked solution
- The unique plot can make money an inadequate substitute.
- That supports consideration of specific performance.
- Discretion and applicable bars still need examination.
Answer The land's particular character may support specific performance where damages are inadequate, but breach does not guarantee it. The court must consider the enforceable obligation, practicality and applicable equitable limits.
Try a topic test
Choose Easy, Normal or Difficult. Save your answers and open worked review after finishing.
Test this topic →From guided practice to a new situation
Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.
Guided: Give the reason money might be inadequate in the plot example.
Give me a hint
Use the particular property.
Compare my reasoning
- Identify the specific plot.
- Explain why a cash substitute may not replace it.
- Preserve discretion and bars.
The particular plot may not be replaceable by an equivalent cash purchase, supporting inadequacy of damages. That is a reason to consider specific performance, not proof that the court must grant it.
Look for these in your work
- Uses uniqueness
- Explains inadequacy
- Preserves discretion
Independent: A party asks the court to force an individual to perform personal work. What practical and legal limit matters?
Give me a hint
Relief cannot simply bypass the personal-service concern.
Compare my reasoning
- Identify personal service.
- Consider compelled work and supervision.
- Assess appropriate monetary or other lawful relief.
Courts generally resist specific performance compelling personal service, including practical supervision and coercion concerns. A different remedy needs a proper basis and cannot automatically be used to force the same personal work indirectly.
Look for these in your work
- Identifies service
- Uses limits
- Avoids evasion
Application: Compare termination for breach with rescission for an established vitiating factor.
Give me a hint
Future obligations and unwinding differ.
Compare my reasoning
- Termination releases future performance subject to accrued rights.
- Rescission seeks to unwind on its legal ground.
- Apply remedy-specific bars.
Termination for repudiatory breach and rescission do different work. The first ends future obligations while accrued rights require consideration; the second seeks unwinding on a recognised ground and is subject to its own restoration, affirmation, delay and third-party limits.
Look for these in your work
- Distinguishes purposes
- Uses grounds
- Uses specific bars
Common mistakes
- Guaranteeing equitable relief
- Treating rescission as every breach remedy
- Ignoring third-party rights or supervision
What can you explain now?
Does breach alone guarantee specific performance?
Compare with the explanation
No
An enforceable obligation and the relevant discretionary considerations must be assessed.
After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.
Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.
Make it stick
Does breach alone guarantee specific performance?
If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.