Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law First Year > Contract Law Second Term - FRUSTRATION > Flashcards

Contract Law Second Term - FRUSTRATION Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

What are the three circumstances in which frustration is used?

A

Performance is illegal, physically impossible or requires something radically different

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

‘No excuses’

A

Paradine v Jane

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Paradine v Jane

A

‘No excuses’; enemy invasion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Taylor v Caldwell

A

Music hall

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

How did they invoked frustration in Taylor v Caldwell?

A

Implied term if subject ceases to exist then no contract

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What Act could Taylor v Caldwell now try and claim under?

A

LR(FC)A 1943

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Jackson v The Union Marine

A

6 months stranded; ‘would have been a different voyage’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What are the three issues with implied term in Taylor?

A

How can unforeseen events be implied, does not consider all terms that would have been implied and courts still frustrate even with FM clauses

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

James Scott v R & N

A

Tiger and milk girl

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Denny, Mott v James B Fraser

A

‘Reservations’ parties would have made etc are not implied in as terms

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Ertel Bieber v Rio Tinto on FM clauses

A

Still frustrate contract even with FM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Ertel Bieber v Rio Tinto on legal impossibility

A

Cannot exclude doctrine of F by express term for subsequent illegality

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Who gave that the test is that the outcome is something ‘radically different’?

A

Lord Radcliffe in Davis Contractors v Fareham Urban DC

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What did the court refuse to recognise in Davis Contractors v Fareham UDC?

A

Commercial impracticability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Fibrosa Spolka v Fairbairn

A

Illegal due to war

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Baily v De Crespigny

A

Acquisition of land by state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Metropolitan Water Board v Dick Kerr

A

Reservoir, ministry; ‘substitute a different contract’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Cricklewood Property v Leighton’s Investment

A

99 years, restriction left 90 so not radically different

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What are the three sub-categories of physical impossibility?

A

Death/incapacity, destruction of subject matter and delay/hardship

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Marshall v Harland

A

Test for sufficient incapacity: ‘impossible’ or ‘radically different’ performance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

FC Shepherd v Jerrom

A

Prison

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Notcutt v Universal Equipment

A

Heart-attack; void

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Phillips v Alhambra

A

Proprietor died; others could perform

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Name two cases where subject matter was destroyed

A

Taylor v Caldwell; Appleby v Myers; Asfar v Blundell; Jackson v The Union Marine

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Asfar v Blundell

A

Dates submerged; partial but substantially different

26
Q

Jackson v The Union Marine on destruction of subject

A

6 months stranded; ‘practical commercial destruction’

27
Q

Davis Contractors on delay and hardship

A

‘More onerous’ but not of a ‘different kind’

28
Q

Jackson v The Union Marine on delay and hardship

A

Time of the essence; ‘with all possible dispatch’

29
Q

The Eugenia

A

Suez canal

30
Q

Why was the delay not sufficient in The Eugenia?

A

108 - 128 and not of the essence.

31
Q

Two cases on impossibility of purpose

A

Krell v Henry; Herne Bay Steamboat v Hutton

32
Q

Krell v Henry

A

Coronation

33
Q

Herne Bay Steamboat v Hutton

A

Pleasureboats

34
Q

What are contractual interpretations for in frustration?

A

To see if either party made provision

35
Q

What are the two ways to interpret provision in contracts for frustration?

A

Express terms or implied allocation

36
Q

Metropolitan Water Board on express term for F

A

Delay did not apply as ‘so abnormal’ it fell outside what parties could have ‘possibly contemplated’

37
Q

What case shows implied allocation of risk for F?

A

WJ Tatem v Gamboa

38
Q

WJ Tatem v Gamboa

A

Civil war refugee ship

39
Q

What was the implied allocation in WJ Tatem?

A

Highly foreseeable so allocated to performing party

40
Q

What was frustrating in WJ Tatem?

A

Length of seizure rather than seizure itself

41
Q

To prove fault in F, who is the onus on?

A

Onus on C to show D brought it about

42
Q

The Eugenia on fault

A

Charterers in BoC by entering war zone

43
Q

The SS2

A

Drilling rig, self-induced

44
Q

Jerrom on anticipatory breach and fault

A

Person at fault cannot rely on doctrine of F

45
Q

Maritime National v Ocean Trawlers

A

Five licences

46
Q

Chandler v Webster

A

Coronation, £100 and £41

47
Q

Fibrosa Spolka v Fairbairn

A

Occupation; ‘total failure of consideration’

48
Q

What was the ‘quasi-contractual’ claim in Fibrosa?

A

For unjust enrichment

49
Q

What section is money covered in LR(FC)A?

A

S.1(2)

50
Q

What section are non-money benefits covered in LR(FC)A?

A

S.1(3)

51
Q

Lobb v Vasey

A

Under s.1(2) onus on D to show ‘just’

52
Q

Gamerco v ICM/Fair Warning

A

Guns and roses

53
Q

Which case highlighted three possibilities for deciding expenses under s.1(2)?

A

Gamerco v ICM/Fair Warning

54
Q

BP Exploration (Libya) v Hunt (No.2)

A

Oil concession

55
Q

What were the two stages in BP?

A

What benefit was conferred? £85 mil (end product minus expropriation) Just award to BP in light of expenses? £35 mil (contract price)

56
Q

What case is not solved by s.1(3)?

A

Appleby v Myers

57
Q

Why is Appleby v Myers not solved by s.1(3)?

A

‘Valuable benefit’ = ‘end product’, but no end product.

58
Q

Who criticised s.1(3) for taking an end-product analysis?

A

McKendrick, “Frustration, Restitution and Loss Apportionment”

59
Q

What arguments in favour of loss apportionment does McKendrick give?

A

Economically sounder and ‘one of the parties has to suffer loss for which neither is responsible’ (Bingham, SS2)

60
Q

Who said ‘grave deficiencies’ are still there in LR(FC)A?

A

McKendrick

Law First Year (24 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions