Question:
Earthquake. Stewart, the owner of ABC Construction, agreed with Joan, the owner of XYZ Hotel that he would complete renovations on her upper scale hotel on the beach in Florida by October 1. The amount due to Stewart under the contract was $250,000. The contract contained a clause by which Stewart would pay Joan $50,000 for each day he was late on completing the project. Unfortunately, an unexpected strong earthquake shook the area; and while the earthquake did not damage the hotel itself, Stewart encountered significant difficulty in getting supplies due to the high demand for building material following the earthquake. Because he believed that traveling, himself, to other states to obtain supplies would be prohibitively expensive, he delayed the project for two weeks while waiting for local stores to have sufficient supplies available. Stewart finished renovations six days late. Joan told Stewart that she owed him nothing but that he owed her $50,000. Stewart told Joan that he was suing for the entire $250,000 because it was not his fault the earthquake delayed matters. Which of the following is Stewart's best defense
a) Impossibility
b) Commercial impracticability
c) Frustration of purpose
d) Material breach
Answer:
b) Commercial impracticability
Step-by-step explanation:
Commercial impracticability is used as a form of defense when an event occurs, which causes the possibility of performance or completing a deal, highly expensive or very difficult for a party involved in the deal.
In this case, Stewart will use commercial impracticability as defense because as an earthquake occurred which isn't his fault, and the earthquake caused difficulty in getting materials which made Stewart not to complete the work within the stipulated time he agreed with Joan