Why was the plaintiff successful in the case of Bettini v Gye $(1876)1$ QBD $183?$

Group of answer choices

The term was an innominate term, and the breach was not serious enough to entitle the other party to repudiate.

The term which had been breached was a warranty because it was subsidiary to the main purpose of the contract.

The term which had been breached was a condition because the breach had a serious effect on the contract.

The term which had been breached was a condition because the term was essential to the contract and the other party would not have entered into the contract without it$.$