Specific Performance, Limitations, and Corporate Social Responsibility

This essay provides an overview of specific performance as a remedy in contract law, including its limitations and relevant case laws like Nutbrown V. Thornton and Cohen V. Roche. It further discusses Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), highlighting its importance for companies in the UK and providing examples of companies like Tesla, Coca-Cola, and Starbucks that actively engage in CSR initiatives. The essay concludes that CSR benefits both society and a company's brand image, contributing to sustainable development and improved goodwill.

Essay

INTRODUCTION
Law is a legal framework which comprises of rules and regulations applicable over the
individuals or a group of individuals of a society. It keeps a check over the conducts of people or
a group of them. An organisation or an institution which comprises of people with same interest
who works together to achieve a set of goals, performs certain activities which are supervised by
the authorized group of individuals of the country. Law is diversified into many streams such as
contract law which makes sure that a promise which is enforceable by law is completed while
complying with the terms mentioned in the contract law(Bag, S., 2018). Promises or a set of
promises which results into agreement including consideration for both the parties, which is
enforceable by the law is known as contract. There are few essential elements to make a valid
contract such as, the offer and acceptance, both the parties should be competent to contract, legal
intention of the parties, free consent of them and there should be legal subject and consideration.
In this essay we will cover the remedy for the specific performance, the limitations imposed by
the court, the relevant case laws and elaborate the extent of the companies to take Corporate
Social Responsibility.
MAIN BODY
Specific performance is a remedy in the law of contract, where a court issues a decree to a
particular party to perform a specific act in order to complete the performance of the act. The
specific performance is taken into consideration when the monetary damages are inadequate to
fix the harm caused to the plaintiff. It is a remedy which is available for the breach of contract.
For example, if a party refuses to comply with the contractual obligations then the court can
issue a decree which will compel the party to perform the said obligations rather than asking for
the monetary compensation(Dahm, L.L., 2020).There are certain limitations of this act which
says that when the damages are adequate the execution of specific performance is impossible
because the execution of the above performance only takes place when the monetary
compensation is not enough to compensate the innocent party. The other limitation is, vitiating
factors which holds the power to cripple or cease the enforceability of the contract such as
misrepresentation, undue influence etc. If these factors influences the case then the specific
performance can not be a remedy for it because these factors will invalidate the contract and will
force the defendant to compensate the loss suffered by the innocent party with sufficient

compensation(Gong, and et. al., 2021).The performance of the act is completely dependant on
the court's decision because the court agrees to a point after considering arguable points of both
the parties, the decree can only be issued for the above act when the judge finds it as an
appropriate remedy. The relevant case law in which a decree was issued by the court for the
specific performance was Nutbrown V. Thornton(1805), in this case a contract was formed to
purchase some machinery but the delivery of the machines was refused by the defendant in
breach of contract. As the defendant was the only manufacturer for the type of machine which
was needed by the plaintiff. So the court issued an order for the specific performance of the act
as the damages would be inadequate to compensate for the loss. The next case for not issuing the
specific performance of the act as a remedy is, Cohen V. Roche (1927) in this case the owner of
a furniture shop entered into an agreement to purchase the chairs but later the delivery was
refused. Due to breach of contract the court ordered the defendant to compensate the claimant
sufficiently through the award of damages (Gürlek, M. and et. al., 2019).A decree was not issued
in this case for the specific performance of the contract as the award of damages were sufficient
to compensate the claimant. In context to both the case laws, the court issued an order for the
specific performance of the contract in the first case as the different remedy such as
compensation for the loss on the basis of monetary terms was an inadequate remedy because the
loss of the claimant can only be covered by the specific performance of the contract where the
court issued an order to the defendant to deliver the machines to the claimant and comply with
the agreed upon terms. On the other hand the next case law states that the award of damages was
adequate compensation for the loss suffered by the claimant so the court terminated the contract
due to its non- compliance and ordered the defendant to compensate for the loss suffered by the
claimant and put him back to the position where the claimant was before the contract was formed
or put him into the position where the innocent party would have been, after the completion of
the contract.
Corporate Social Responsibility is the responsibility of a group of people working as an
organisation for the impact of its decisions and activities being performed by them on the society
and the environment through the transparent and ethical behaviour which plays a vital role in the
sustainable development which includes the health and the welfare of the society(Hesselink,
M.W., 2020). Under the laws of the United Kingdom , CSR is not a necessary activity for
companies but it is a voluntary act that has no act of parliament and is just made for the social

responsibility of the companies. Few examples of Corporate Social Responsibility in action are
reducing carbon footprints, improving labour policies, commencement of NGOs, charity etc.
There are four main divisions of Corporate social responsibility activities and they are
environment, people, procurement and community(Muttakin, and et. al., 2018). CSR helps the
society as well as the brand image of the companies. It is the great way to raise the morale in the
workplace. The Corporate Social Responsibility is undertaken by the organisations very
seriously till every extent which helps in the sustainable development of the society and the
environment by conducting such activities which makes sure that the development is ensured
through every aspect. Every organisation sets a goal to benefit the society in a certain way for
example Tesla is an auto mobile company which purely deals in electric cars which benefits the
society through less fuel consumption. The company coco-cola which deals in beverages has
huge focus on sustainability and has made many efforts for the development of the society which
focuses on the health of the people and reducing the wastage of plastic bottles which are used as
the secondary packaging by the company. Keeping in mind the growing health concern of the
people and the issue regarding disposal of the plastic bottles or cans, Coco-cola has introduced
diet coke which attracts a huge interest of people with health concerns and has enforced the aim
of collecting and recycling every bottle while making their packaging 100% recyclable. The aim
of the company by approx 2030 is, reducing their carbon footprints by 25%. The United
Kingdom's companies claims to spend five to ten percent of their turnover on social and
environmental measures. Nowadays the companies are more inclined towards charities, starting
more NGOs and starting new campaigns for the benefit and upliftment of the society. Starbucks
is the leading example for Corporate Social Responsibility as it benefits the society by its famous
campaign which is the Ethos water fund(Pan, X., and et. al., 2021). As Starbucks supports Ethos
Water in a campaign whose prime aim is to bring clean water to 1 billion people around the
world. This fund is a part of the Starbucks foundation and a percent of the sale of the Ethos
Water goes in the campaign as funding. The company has been investing in local communities
for over 20 years around the world and the strong focus of the company is on creating job and
training opportunities for the people for the welfare of the people of the county. Through the
above mentioned examples of the companies who are playing a vital role by considering the
Corporate Social Responsibility, it is clearly stated that the welfare of the society is kept in mind
while managing the operations of the corporation(Schroeder, J.L., 2020).The efforts made for the

upliftment of the society and its sustainable development always results in increment of
intangible assets of the business organisation which is Goodwill of the company.
CONCLUSION
In context to the above essay, the points concluded in the essay is the definition of
specific performance with its limitation. The case laws covering the situation when specific
performance is enforced by the court and the vice-versa of it. Furthermore, this essay has also
explained what is Corporate Social Responsibility and some of its examples while discussing the
extent of the corporations taking Corporate Social Responsibility seriously. At the end, the
companies taking appropriate initiative for the welfare of the societies while focusing on the
sustainable development for the people of the country and the environment are also discussed in
the following essay.

REFERENCES
Bag, S., 2018. Concluding Notes. In Economic Analysis of Contract Law (pp. 191-198).
Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Dahm, L.L., 2020. Ethics in Contract Drafting: Should We Fix What's Broken or Start over and
Create Something Better?. S. Tex. L. Rev., 61, p.1.
Gong, and et. al., 2021. Punishment by securities regulators, corporate social responsibility and
the cost of debt. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(2), pp.337-356.
Gürlek, M. and et. al., 2019. Corporate social responsibility and work engagement: Evidence
from the hotel industry. Tourism Management Perspectives, 31, pp.195-208.
Hesselink, M.W., 2020. The right to justification of contract. Ratio juris, 33(2), pp.196-222.
Muttakin, and et. al., 2018. Corporate political connection and corporate social responsibility
disclosures: A neo-pluralist hypothesis and empirical evidence. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal.
Pan, X., and et. al., 2021. Corporate social responsibility and eco‐innovation: The triple bottom
line perspective. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 28(1), pp.214-228.
Schroeder, J.L., 2020. Sense, Sensibility and Smart Contracts: A View From a Contract
Lawyer. UCCL Rev., 49, p.251.