Can a vendor of land be held responsible for losses resulting from a re-sale?

Even if Triple Five had proved damages, those damages may not have been recoverable. There is authority for the proposition that a vendor of land must have knowledge that the purchaser intends the possibility of re-sale before he can be held responsible for damages resulting from loss of a re-sale. In B. Zar Enterprises v. Kitchen (1982) 23 R.P.R. 17 at 25 (B.C.S.C.), Ruttan J. stated: "B. Zar Enterprises have defined themselves as developers, and not primarily engaged in the buying and selling of real estate … The possibility of making greater profits by resale instead of development was not contemplated by either party at the time of the transaction, and the loss of such profit is not a head of damage that can reasonably be expected to arise from the transaction."