Buyer and Seller entered into a sales contract to buy 10,000 kg chemical products at a price of RMB 200 yuan/kg, totalling RMB 2 million yuan. Among other things, the sales contract stipulated the following terms and conditions: within 10 days after the conclusion of the contract Buyer would make the advance payment of RMB 500,000 yuan and Seller was to deliver all the goods to the place of Buyer; the remaining price of RMB 1·5 million yuan should be paid within five days upon the delivery of goods; any breach of contract should be subject to the liquidated damages equivalent to 20% of the total price.Buyer made the advance payment, but Seller did not deliver any goods. Buyer urged Seller to deliver the goods immediately, as its production would be seriously affected by the short supply of the goods. However, Seller declared force majeure as the reason for non-delivery. Seller insisted that it was only a trading company, not a producer of the chemical products. Seller alleged that upon the conclusion of the contract, it entered into a purchase agreement with a producer to buy the goods from the latter. Due to a fire accident, the producer could not supply the goods under the purchase agreement; Seller therefore could not deliver the goods to Buyer. Non-delivery of goods was due to force majeure that caused the failure to supply the goods by the producer to Seller.Buyer refused to accept Seller’s argument and bought 10,000 kg of the same products for replacement at a price of RMB 220 yuan/kg, resulting in a total extra cost of RMB 200,000 yuan. Meanwhile it filed a lawsuit against Seller in the court, requesting liquidated damages of RMB 400,000 yuan (20% of the total price) and the damages of RMB 200,000 yuan for extra price caused for the urgent purchase.Required:Answer the following questions in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Contract Law, and give your reasons for your answer:
(a) state whether Seller’s argument of force majeure can be established; (5 marks)