The arguments that would support Validay’s claim for specific performance in addition to damages

The arguments that would support Validay’s claim for specific performance in addition to damages
Following this case, the specific performance grants Validay its actual bargains in the contract and the damages for failure to receive it. In this case, specific performance exercises equity and its legal remedy. For instance, it reveals of the pecuniary aspect of compensation towards loss brought to Validay by AKC over the failure by the latter to adhere to the agreement. Through making it a compulsory for both Validay and AKC to live up to the performance of their initial agreement, it in this case, enhance full and a perfect realization of justice especially when it proceeds demand for award of damages following the breach of contract by one of the parties who happen to be, in this case, the AKC. Elsewhere, Validay may seek for granting of the specific performance through a court injunction while exercising the powers of equity or in the subsequent determination of where there is validity in the existence of the contract and also in a case of the evaluation of the relief sought.
The arguments that would support AKC’s claim that Validay was not entitled to specific performance in addition to damages?
Generally, the application of specific performance is only in such circumstances where the breach of the contract actions about monetary damages is not enough and also where the involved contract is a unique chattel/personal property. In the case of Validay and AKC, the damages sustained in the breach of the contract remain ascertainable and also recoverable so as not to allow for granting of specific performance.

The denial of specific performance will occur where the money is not enough for compensating the plaintiff who, in this case, is Validay for the loss sustained. On the same note, the court may hand in the determination of the money that is enough for compensation upon the analysis of the area of the subject that forms part of the contract here which happens to be AKC to show a screen credit stating: “A Film by Madge Validay”.  In this regard, the print for this banter may not be enough to provide adequate money since this act is unique in its nature. Also, the award for damages will not make it possible for the Validay to be in a position of acquiring the same rights of printing in any other place.
The side of the argument that is the most convincing
The side with the most convincing argument is that of the Validay.An agreement was reached and signed by the two of which AKC was to comply. Failure by the AKC to comply with the agreement as they initially signed with Validay surmounts or supports the validity of Validay’s argument, in this case, altogether. About business law, the remedy for a specific performance always gives the proposition for the authenticity of a valid contract that binds the warring parties. In this regard, the contractual terms need to be definite and also certain. The instance here remains of great significance since there is no expectation from equity to undertake the enforcement of an invalid contract or that type that is so vague in relation equity term that has no capabilities in the determination of what every constituent party should perform.