What legal concept allows one party to sue another for costs after an anticipatory repudiation is communicated?

The correct choice relates to anticipatory repudiation, which occurs when one party communicates to the other that they will not perform their obligations under the contract before the performance is due. In such situations, the non-breaching party has the right to take action, including suing for costs incurred due to the other party's anticipated failure to perform.

Anticipatory breach allows the non-breaching party to seek damages because they can treat the breach as an immediate violation of the contract and pursue remedies without having to wait until the actual performance date. This concept is critical in contract law, as it helps to provide clarity and allows the non-breaching party to mitigate losses that could arise from non-performance.

Specific performance, on the other hand, refers to a court-ordered remedy requiring a party to fulfill their contractual obligations, which is not applicable in this context since the question focuses on costs resulting from anticipatory repudiation. Tort claims generally involve civil wrongs outside contractual obligations and do not specifically address issues arising from breach of contract. Material breach refers to a significant violation of the contract's terms but does not specifically relate to anticipatory repudiation and the associated costs that can be sued for at that stage.