What is the difference between "specific performance" and "damages" as remedies for breach of contract?

Specific performance requires fulfillment of contractual obligations because it is a legal remedy used in contract law that compels a party to execute a specific act, typically the performance of a contract as agreed upon. This remedy is particularly applicable in cases where monetary damages would be inadequate to compensate the injured party, such as in contracts involving unique goods or real estate, where the particular item or property is of such a nature that, if not delivered or rendered, no substitute can satisfy the promise.

When a court orders specific performance, it requires the breaching party to perform exactly what was stipulated in the contract, rather than simply providing monetary compensation to the aggrieved party. Such a remedy emphasizes the importance of honoring the specific terms of the agreement rather than focusing solely on the financial aspect.

In contrast, monetary damages are typically awarded to compensate a party for losses incurred due to a breach of contract without forcing the breaching party to fulfill their original contractual obligations. This distinction highlights the nature and application of each remedy within the realm of contract enforcement.