Short answer. Yes. Article 1596 of the Civil Code expressly provides that the profit the seller would have made if the contract or the sale had been fully performed shall be considered in awarding damages for non-acceptance. Lost profit is a recognized element of the seller's damages when the buyer repudiates.
What the law says
The profit the seller would have made if the contract or the sale had been fully performed shall be considered in awarding the damages.
Civil Code, Article 1596 — Seller's Action for Damages (Non-Acceptance). Read the full provision →
Lost profit is expressly included in damages
Article 1596 of the Civil Code provides the framework for the seller's damages when the buyer refuses or neglects to accept and pay for goods. Among the elements the article recognizes is a specific and explicit provision: The profit the seller would have made if the contract or the sale had been fully performed shall be considered in awarding the damages. This means that if the completed sale would have given you a profit, that lost profit is a legitimate component of your damages claim. The buyer cannot simply argue that you suffered no loss because you still have the goods — the profit you would have earned is recognized as part of what you lost.
The general measure of damages
Beyond lost profit, Article 1596 establishes the general measure of damages for non-acceptance. The baseline is the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting in the ordinary course of events from the buyer's breach of contract. Where there is an available market for the goods, the damages are typically measured as the difference between the contract price and the market or current price at the time the goods ought to have been accepted — or at the time of refusal if no acceptance date was fixed. If the market price has risen since the sale was agreed, the seller's actual loss may be smaller. If the market has fallen, the seller's loss is greater.
Labor and expenses before notice of repudiation
Article 1596 also addresses what happens when the buyer repudiates before the seller has finished preparing the goods. If the seller had to perform work or incur expenses to fulfill the contract, and the buyer repudiated or countermanded the order before completion, the buyer is liable for labor performed or expenses made before receiving notice of the buyer's repudiation or countermand. Work done in good faith before the seller learns of the repudiation is compensable. Work done after the seller knew of the repudiation and chose to continue anyway is not protected — at that point, the seller should stop incurring additional costs.
Practical implications for the seller
If the buyer repudiated your contract before delivery, your damages picture has multiple components: the difference between the contract price and what you can now get for the goods in the market, any labor or expenses you incurred before learning of the repudiation, and the profit you would have earned if the contract had been completed. You should document all of these elements carefully. The lost profit in particular requires showing what your margin would have been on a completed sale. Courts have discretion in how they quantify damages, but Article 1596 makes clear that profit is not excluded from the calculation — it is a recognized item to be considered.