In Bravo v. Buelow (1985) 168 Cal. App. 3d 208, the seller of an empty lot who had entered into a sales agreement with the buyer, refused to complete her part of the transaction. After a court trial, the buyer was awarded specific performance. During trial, the buyer had testified that the costs of constructing a building--his intended use for the property--had increased substantially since the date of the parties' contract. Accordingly, the court added to the judgment for specific performance an allowance for the increased building costs during the delay caused by the seller. The seller argued on appeal that there was "no California precedent for allowing increased costs of intended construction as an incident to a decree of specific performance" and that such "increased costs of construction," therefore, "are not permitted." (Id. at p. 212.) The court disagreed: "'In California the compensation which may be awarded incident to a decree of specific performance is not for breach of contract and is not legal damages. The complainant affirms the contract and asks that it be performed. Since the time for performance has passed, the court relates that performance back to that date, by treating the parties as if the change in ownership had taken place at that time. Thus the buyer is entitled to the rents and profits from the time the contract should have been performed, and the seller is entitled to an offset for the interest on the purchase money which he would have received had the contract been performed. The process is more like an accounting between the parties than an assessment of damages.'" (Id. at p. 213, quoting Ellis v. Mihelis (1963) 60 Cal.2d 206, 219-220.)