1. A massive world war has broken out. Fighting is raging everywhere, especially on the high seas of the North Atlantic Ocean. But Thomasa farmer in Iowagrows wheat, which is desperately needed in the cities of Europe. Because Thomas also desperately needs to sell his crop, he contracts with HLS Shipping to transport a load of wheat by ship from Baltimore to Southampton, England.

HLS insists on an extremely high rate for the passage, due to the wartime conditions, and so Thomas insists on a special clause in the contract that says, Parties agree that shippers obligation to deliver the wheat shall be absolute, however, and that no act of man or God shall release it of that obligation.

Halfway through the voyage, the ship is torpedoed, and the grain is lost. HLS is willing to reimburse the shipping cost to Thomas but not the value of the lost wheat. HLS refuses to pay any other damages, arguing that delivery became impracticable once the ship was lost. Thomas says that HLS promised to deliver the wheat to England and that it did not, so he wants the cost of the voyage and the wheat across the Atlantic back as damages. Who should win that disagreement? (Select 1)

A. Thomas shipping the wheat is not impracticable at all; it could be recovered with submarines and HLS could simply put it on another ship.

B. HLS in a time of war, a court would probably try to help a shipper who suffered a loss like HLS did, so the court would probably not hold HLS to its deal with Thomas.

C. Thomas the parties thought about the possibility of a wartime incident like the one that occurred, and they accounted for it in making their deal.

D. HLS this is a case of commercial impracticability: after the ship was gone, it would be unreasonable to expect that HLS would take whatever steps necessary to get the wheat transported, or to pay damages for failing to do so.