Head sold the horse "Imago" to Tattersall for $15,000 on April 25th, and their contract contained a term stating "the purchaser is entitled to get his money back and to return Imago if he is unable to enter the horse in the races at Sandown Raceway within one year after the date of purchase." Tattersall intended to race Imago as soon as possible. However, three months later, while Imago was being hauled in a trailer from Victoria to a farm near Parksville, the trailer was hit by a huge boulder that fell down the side of the Malahat Highway and Imago was injured; the injuries reduced its value dramatically (to $1,000). After Tattersall's veterinarian advised him that he could forget about ever entering Imago in any competitive racing, Tattersall approached Head and insisted he take back the horse and give him his money back. Head retorted that he would not take the horse back because its incapacity had nothing to do with him. Tattersall commenced an action against him. 

Question:

There are two options here: either the contract was discharged by the term or it was frustrated by an Act of God. Discuss whether or not the contract was discharged by the specific term allowing Tattersall to get his money back or whether the contract was frustrated by an act of God.

 

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Answer To determine whether the contract between Head and Tattersall was discharged by the specific term allowing Tattersall to get his money back or ... View the full answer