Problem
The Ponderosa is a cattle station located in the outback of South Australia. The station is bigger than Slovenia, Lebanon, or Luxembourg. PelletQueen is a German agribusiness that manufactures and supplies stock feed supplements to the grazing industry. The company has become famous in Australia for their pellets (pasture fed supplements) for cattle, which increase cattle's weight gain and fertility.
In June 2022, The Ponderosa contracted with PelletQueen, for the sale and delivery of two containers of cattle pellets. According to the contract, delivery was to be made at the Cattle Station, South Australia. The contract price was $100,000.
The contract also included a term which said that the delivery of the goods was to be made "in good condition".
On 31 July, the consignment was delivered at The Ponderosa. A significant quantity of the pellets arrived damaged. The Ponderosa rejected the shipment and claimed the return of the price which had already been paid. The sellers refused to repay the money.
What happened next is very unusual. The rejected shipment was sold by PelletQueen to "Bugs Bunnings", an Australian wholesaler that also supplies stock feed supplements, for $33,000. Subsequently, the very same pellets were resold for $50,000 to The Ponderosa who then used the whole consignment for their intended purpose, namely: animal food.
Task
Discuss whether La Ponderosa was entitled to terminate the contract with PelletQueen?