A mandatory interlocutory injunction requiring exercise of a contractual nomination right is not de facto final relief where the crucial right at issue is ownership of the land rather than the option mechanism itself, and the orders preserve the land's availability for both parties pending trial. The adequacy of damages for development land adjacent to an existing development is a matter for the primary judge's assessment, and an appellate court should not gainsay that conclusion without good reason.
The full text is available to signed-in members.