Sarah's entitlement to damages after her successful lawsuit signifies what outcome?

Sarah's entitlement to damages after her successful lawsuit signifies a restorative remedy because the primary goal of such damages is to make her whole again following a harm or injury caused by another party's actions. Restorative remedies are designed to compensate the injured party for losses incurred, rather than to punish the wrongdoer or provide some form of non-monetary relief.

In this context, damages serve to restore Sarah’s position as much as possible to what it would have been if the harm had not occurred. This aligns with the fundamental principles of tort law where the aim is to provide financial compensation for injuries, rather than imposing punitive measures or offering equitable relief, which focuses on fairness and justice rather than compensation.

The other potential outcomes do not apply here; punitive actions involve penalties imposed to deter wrongdoing rather than compensate the victim, equitable relief addresses specific performance or injunctions rather than monetary damages, and a legal acknowledgment of wrongdoing does not inherently involve compensation but rather recognizes that a legal fault occurred. Therefore, the concept of restorative remedy is the correct interpretation of Sarah's situation.