When can a portion of 25.38 acres be seeded, can the portion that could not be seeded be sown?

The learned trial Judge accepted as a basis of the estimate the average yield obtained in 1927 from the summer-fallow which surrounded the portion which could not be seeded. The evidence shows that the plaintiff had great difficulty in seeding a part of the portion that was seeded, and was very late in the work on account of the land being very wet. It was contended, and an effort was made to show that, even had the 25.38 acres been seeded, the crop would have been very poor, and even a failure, as low spots generally produced, in that year, poor crops. I think, however, that the weight of evidence is that this land, had it been seeded, would have produced a crop as good as the land adjoining, and I therefore think that the learned trial Judge was warranted in so holding. The damages in such a case cannot be accurately estimated, and on the authority of Haack v. Martin 1927 CanLII 57 (SCC), [1927] S.C.R. 413, at 419, this method of calculation is not objectionable merely because damages cannot be assessed with mathematical accuracy.