Which statement best differentiates restitution from specific performance?

• A. Restitution is seeking payment, while specific performance seeks to re-do the contract.
• B. Restitution is a punitive measure; specific performance is a form of restitution.
• C. Restitution restores the pre-contract position; Specific performance requires fulfillment of obligation.
• D. Restitution is only available for sale of goods; Specific performance only for services.

Answer: (C)

The key idea is how each remedy aims to address a breach. Restitution is about undoing the unjust enrichment that occurred because one party benefited from the other’s performance, returning the parties toward the position they were in before the contract. In practice this often means restoring value or property—getting back what was conferred or the value of benefits—so the harmed party is not enriched at the other’s expense. Specific performance, by contrast, is an order forcing the breaching party to actually fulfill the promise, because money damages would not adequately compensate for the breach, especially when the subject of the contract is unique or irreplaceable.

So the statement that best differentiates them is that restitution restores the pre-contract position, while specific performance requires fulfillment of the obligation.

The other choices blur these distinctions: restitution isn’t merely payment and isn’t punishing; specific performance is not a form of restitution, and the remedies aren’t limited to sales of goods or to services in that rigid way.