Themba runs a restaurant called Nourish (Pty) Ltd. During an outbreak of a contagious fungal infection, the government enacted legislation, in the form of regulations, prohibiting all restaurants, including Nourish, from opening for a period of five weeks. Since Nourish (Pty) Ltd was not able to open during this five-week period, Themba did not generate income and Nourish (Pty) Ltd was unable to pay its rental of R50,000.00 for the five-week period. Themba received legal advice that Nourish (Pty) Ltd does not need to pay rental for this period due to supervening impossibility. As a result, Themba notified the lessor, Monopoly Management (Pty) Ltd (‘Monopoly’), that Nourish (Pty) Ltd would not be paying rental due to supervening impossibility. Themba approaches you to assist him with resolving this issue with Monopoly. There was no term in the lease addressing the effect of supervening impossibility.

With reference to World Leisure Holidays (Pty) Ltd v Georges 2002 (5) SA 531 (W), explain supervening impossibility to Themba, and advise him regarding the effect of the five-week prohibition on the contractual obligations of the parties.