Historically this statement may seem to be correct. As it was certainly better that parties could gain remedy rather than taking sticks and beating each other up on the common. If we look at this from the beginning of contracts it was much more than just that it gave people their basic rights that was enforceable by the courts. So in the 12 century if the king gave you a piece of land for services done it established that you had a right.

Contract formation is much more than that just rights and remedies. It establishes when a contract is formed there has been a meeting of minds in agreement of particular subject matter. It is means so that parties can do business that is more complicated than bartering and than rely on the courts if there was a dispute for a remedy. To say that it is the purpose of contracts just to provide remedies when a contract fails is unjust as established by its beginnings and formation of the contract.

Contract provides much more for example they can state how the way business will be done and they provide certainty. For example l'Estrange V. Graucob established that a contract is binding once it has been signed. It gave certainty. It not could be argued later by either party that they had not read the contract or did not understand it. If you signed the contract you were from than on bound by it.

As contract law developed the courts staying close to it motto that law should be just and fair to all developed other considerations to make the law clear. The promise of forbearance for which something is delivered the basic principle of consideration which means that the parties must show consideration that the contract is binding as demonstrated in Tweedle V. Atkinson where the parties made a contract for the transference of money to the son of one who was marrying the other one's daughter. It was ruled that when the father died before the contract could be completed that the son could not claim rights on the contract even though he was the beneficiary as he was not party to the original contract. This shows that that contracts are only binding for exactly what is written in them and not what one might consider to be the point of contract.

Contract is about being exact and insuring that each party is protected equally. This is demonstrate by implied terms where quite often the meaning of contract has to be decided from statements, conditions, and warranties within the content of the contract. For example in the case of the Moorcock which broke in half while being repaired due to the seabed being uneven. The courts gave business efficacy by stating that the repairers were under obligation to insure that that goods in there care were looked after. Although it did not state that directly in the contract it was ruled to be an implied term.

If a contract fails there are many options open as a remedy from Non - pecuniary loss to specific performance. There even instances where a contract can be declared void. For example by a mutual mistake as in the Raffles v. Wichelhaus Where both parties had made the mistake about the delivery of goods on different ships with the same name.

In Ruxley electronics V. Forsyth a different issue arose where a contractor had incorrectly built a swimming pool to the wrong specifications. the courts in assessing the damages ruled that they could not order the contract to be performed to the exact specification as that would place and unfair burden on the defendant. The claimant in the case ultimately ended up with a swimming pool that he had not ordered and £2500 for loss of amenity. This case showed It is difficult to calculate damages when a contract is in correctly performed.

In Cohen V. Roche the courts order a monetary payment instead of specific performance. When claimant failed to have his chairs delivered that he won at auction. The court ruled that the chairs were unremarkable and the claimant's claim could be satisfied by the monetary damages.

So in summing contract law is not just about remedies for parties who suffered actually losses. It is about insuring business reliance and efficacy.