Question

1.        Westie owns a farm on the West Coast of the South Island and learns that there is coal under her land. Strip Ltd contracts to strip-mine the coal and the contract specifies that Strip Ltd would take steps to restore the land to its previous condition. Strip Ltd breaches and Westie sues for $25,000 per hectare. At trial, the court is informed that restoration costs are estimated to be $30,000 per hectare. Strip’s lawyers claim that the diminished value of the land was only $500 per hectare. The court awards damages of $10,000 per hectare. Was the breach efficient? Should the court have ruled specific performance?

Answer 1

The breach was not efficient as the restoration costs for trial was estimates as 30000 dollars per hectare.

The restoration costs were estimated at the trial as 30000 per hectare dollars but it was claimed that the diminished land was only of 500 dollars hectare.

There were damages awarded for $10,000 per hectare but this was not very efficient

The court should have ruled specific performance as the contract was unique and the true amount of the damages are not clear. When the real estate cost is unique