▁and ▁had ▁not ▁tried , ▁that ▁it ▁had ▁no ▁assets ▁other ▁than ▁the ▁depos it ▁from ▁Ball antry ▁Inc ▁for ▁the ▁depos it , ▁and ▁it ▁was ▁never ▁going ▁to ▁purchase ▁any ▁other ▁land . ▁ ▁The ▁courts ▁below ▁At ▁the ▁Ontario ▁Super ior ▁Court ▁of ▁Justice , ▁Sp iegel ▁J ▁held ▁that : ▁▁ ▁had ▁the ▁Board ▁used ▁its ▁best ▁efforts , ▁the ▁sever ance ▁would ▁likely ▁have ▁been ▁granted , ▁and ▁the ▁transaction ▁would ▁have ▁been ▁completed ▁by ▁the ▁closing ▁date ; ▁therefore , ▁the ▁Board ’ s ▁bre ach ▁caused ▁South c ott ’ s ▁loss ; ▁ ▁specific ▁performance ▁was ▁not ▁an ▁appropriate ▁rem edy ▁as ▁the ▁land ▁did ▁not ▁have ▁the ▁quality ▁of ▁uniqu eness ; ▁but ▁ ▁South c ott ▁was ▁entitled ▁to ▁dam ages , ▁which ▁were ▁ass essed ▁at ▁$ 1 , 9 3 5 , 5 0 0 . ▁ ▁He ▁rejected ▁the ▁Board ' s ▁submission ▁that ▁South c ott ▁had ▁mit ig ated ▁dam ages ▁through ▁several ▁purch ases ▁subsequent ▁to ▁the ▁bre ach ▁of ▁the ▁agreement , ▁declaring : ▁ ▁The ▁Board ▁appe aled ▁to ▁the ▁Ontario ▁Court ▁of ▁App e al , ▁where ▁Sh ar pe ▁J A ▁held ▁that : ▁▁ ▁the ▁trial ▁judge ▁did ▁not ▁err ▁in ▁finding ▁that ▁the ▁Board ' s ▁bre ach ▁was ▁the ▁cause ▁of ▁the ▁failure ▁to ▁obtain ▁a ▁sever ance ▁by ▁the ▁closing ▁date , ▁but ▁ ▁he ▁did ▁err ▁in ▁law ▁in ▁finding ▁that ▁the ▁Board ▁had ▁not ▁shown ▁that ▁South