If you were John Wunder and had completed your mining venture, what would you have done if faced with the prospect of having to remediate the land at a cost of $60000? Does this outcome make sense to you?

A MINING COMPANY ENTERED INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE LANDOWNER. THE COMPANY WAS ENTITLED TO REMOVE SAND AND GRAVEL FOR SEVEN YEARS. IN EXCHANGE, IT HAD TO PAY $105 000 AND IT WAS REQUIRED TO RE-LEVEL THE GROUND AT THE END OF THE LEASE.

AFTER REMOVING A GREAT DEAL OF SAND AND GRAVEL, THE COMPANY LEFT HUGE CRATERS ON THE PROPERTY. IT DID SO FOR ECONOMIC REASONS. THE COST OF RE-LEVELLING THE LAND WAS $60 000, BUT EVEN IF THAT WORK WAS DONE, THE PROPERTY WOULD BE WORTH ONLY $12 000.

THE PLAINTIFF CLAIMED THAT EXPECTATION DAMAGES SHOULD BE MEASURED BY THE COST OF CURE. IT ARGUED THAT IT EXPECTED TO RECEIVE A LEVEL PIECE OF LAND AT THE END OF THE LEASE AND THAT IT WAS THEREFORE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PUT THE LAND INTO THAT CONDITION. IN RESPONSE, THE DEFENDANT CLAIMED THAT EXPECTATION DAMAGES SHOULD BE MEASURED BY THE LOSS OF VALUE. IT ARGUED THAT WHAT THE PLAINTIFF REALLY EXPECTED TO RECEIVE UNDER THE CONTRACT WAS LAND WORTH $12 000.

THE COURT AGREED WITH THE PLAINTIFF AND AWARDED $60 000 IN EXPECTATION DAMAGES