Is a condominium unit substantially upgraded to make it more attractive for sale to a prospective buyer a specific performance?

This was the gist of the conclusion of Brockenshire J. in Dick v. Dennis (1991), 20 R.P.R. (2d) 264, who concluded that fairness would dictate that the vendors in the case before him who had substantially upgraded a condominium unit to make it more attractive for a purchase. They had no use for the unit when their prospective purchaser attempted to back out of the deal. Brockenshire J. granted them specific performance because in his view the obligations of ownership and the risk of an eventual resale, fairly speaking, should be transferred to the buyer who had agreed in writing to purchase it.