Which of the following scenarios is typically not a candidate for specific performance?

• A. A contract to sell a house
• B. A contract to provide fitness training services
• C. A contract to buy a rare stamp
• D. A contract to purchase custom-made boots

Answer: (B)

Specific performance is an equitable remedy used when money damages wouldn’t adequately compensate the non-breaching party. It’s most common for contracts involving real property or unique, irreplaceable items, where the exact performance cannot be easily substituted.

A contract to sell a house fits this well because land is unique and its transfer is not easily replaced by the monetary value of the breach. A contract to buy a rare stamp is another example where the item is one-of-a-kind, making specific performance a reasonable remedy. A contract to purchase custom-made boots also involves a unique, customized item that wouldn’t be readily replaceable with a substitute, so specific performance can be appropriate.

A contract to provide fitness training services is a personal services contract. Courts generally do not compel a person to perform personal services, as forcing someone to work raises policy concerns and is not typically enforceable through specific performance. Damages or other remedies are the usual course.

So the scenario not typically eligible for specific performance is the one involving the fitness training services.