Anticipatory repudiation occurs when a party clearly indicates they will not perform what is due. Which statement correctly defines anticipatory repudiation?

• A. A definite and unequivocal statement by the promisor that they will not perform when due.
• B. A mere failure to perform on the due date.
• C. An unambiguous offer to perform at a later date.
• D. A breach only when non-performance occurs.

Answer: (B)

Anticipatory repudiation is triggered when a party clearly indicates they will not perform when performance is due. The indication must be definite and unequivocal—words or conduct that make it clear they won’t perform at the time performance is due. Because of that clear refusal to perform, the other party may treat the contract as breached and choose to suspend their own performance or sue for damages right away, rather than waiting.

Why this best fits: it captures the essence of anticipatory repudiation—a definite, unequivocal statement of nonperformance in the future, not merely an event that happens later.

Why the other scenarios don’t fit: simply missing the performance date is a breach that occurs at the time performance is due, not anticipatory repudiation. Offering to perform at a later date signals willingness to perform instead of a refusal, so it isn’t a repudiation. A breach occurs when non-performance actually happens, not merely when repudiation is anticipated.