As mentioned in question\"! above, Peter runs a printing business. Negotiations were conducted by Peter with Best Carrier Ltd entirely by telephone, with respect to the delivery by this company of a new piece of expensive machinery, with Peter emphasising to the CEO of Best Carrier Ltd that if the machinery was damaged in transit it would cause him delays in the completion of a job for Monash University; his biggest client. The machinery was indeed damaged in transit due to the fact that the relevant Best Carrier Ltd truck driver lost control of the truck and hit a tree. Police investigations subsequently revealed that, at the time of the accident, the truck driver was drunk and, as a result, vastly exceeded the legally- permitted blood alcohol concentration limit for fully licensed drivers in Victoria. Peter spent over $35,000 to have the relevant machinery repaired. This repair also meant that Peter was one month late in completing the printing job for Monash University. As a result ofthis delay, Peter was informally advised that Monash University will be looking for a new printing company. Peter estimates that this will result in a loss for his business of over $500,000. Peter was unable to replace Monash University with new clients. Forthe purposes of this question, please assume that the exclusion clause referred to in question 1 above does not apply. Peter needs to determine whether he has a right to terminate the contract with Best Carrier Ltd, and whether or not that is the case, he also needs to determine whether he is entitled to damages. (A) Does Peter have the right to terminate the contract for breach in performance, according to the law of contract? (2 marks). (B) What damages can Peter claim from Best Carrier Ltd as a result of its breach of contract, according to the law of contract? (4 marks). Do not discuss the Australian Consumer Law. Please refer to any relevant legal cases and/or legislation to support your arguments, and ensure that you fully explain your answer. Type your answers in the box below. Peter runs a printing business. In April 2022 negotiations were conducted by Peter with Best Carrier Ltd entirely by telephone, with respect to the delivery by this company of a new piece of expensive machinery, with Peter emphasising to the CEO of Best Carrier Ltd that if the machinery was damaged in transit it would cause him delays in the completion of a job for Monash University; his biggest client. The machinery was indeed damaged in transit due to the fact that the relevant Best Carrier Ltd truck driver lost control of the truck and hit a tree. Police investigations subsequently revealed that, at the time of the accident, the truck driver was drunk and, as a result, vastly exceeded the legally- permitted blood alcohol concentration limit for fully licensed drivers in Victoria. When the (damaged) machinery was delivered to Peter, one of his employees signed a form which contained an exclusion clause. The exemption clause excluded liability for damage \"caused by any acts or defaults of the carrier or otherwise". Peter's employee did not read the form. Can Best Carrier Ltd rely on the exclusion clause to avoid liability, according to the law of contract? Do not discuss the Australian Consumer Law. Please refer to any relevant legal cases andKor legislation to support your arguments, and ensure that you fully explain your answer. Type your answer in the box below