Business Law 5th Edition by David Twomey ,Marianne Jennings ,Stephanie Greene

تمرين 12

Bobby Murray Chevrolet, Inc., submitted a bid to the Alamance County Board of Education to supply 1,200 school bus chassis to the district. Bobby Murray was awarded the contract and contracted with General Motors (GM) to purchase the chassis for the school board.
Between the time of Bobby Murray's contract with GM and the delivery date, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enacted new emission standards for diesel vehicles, such as school buses. Under the new law, the buses Bobby Murray ordered from GM would be out of compliance, as would the buses Bobby Murray specified in its bid to the school board.
GM asked for several extensions to manufacture the buses within the new EPA guidelines. The school board was patient and gave several extensions, but then, because of its need for buses, purchased them from another supplier after notifying Bobby Murray of its intent to do so. The school board had to pay an additional $150,152.94 for the buses from its alternative source and sued Bobby Murray for that amount. Bobby Murray claimed it was excused from performance on the grounds of commercial impracticability. Is Bobby Murray correct Does the defense of commercial impracticability apply in this situation Be sure to compare this case with other cases and examples in the chapter. [Alamance County Board of Education v Bobby Murray Chevrolet, Inc., 465 SE2d 306 (NC App); rev. denied, 467 SE2d 899 (NC)]