Discharge by Frustration Flashcards
General Rule
Paradine v Jane
-If a party has assumed an Absolute obligation, even if the circumstances make performance of this obligation Impossible, he is liable for Breach of Contract
Taylor v Caldwell
-Implied condition in the contract excusing the Parties if performance became impossible without the fault of the Parties
Define Frustration
- A Supervening Event – Apply to facts
- Which is Unforeseen (not covered by a provision)
- Outside of the Control of the Parties – Apply to facts - Maritime Fish Ltd
- Rendering the Contract Impossible to Perform or Radically Different – Apply to Facts - Davis Contractors
Events will Frustrate - Essential person Unavailable
Condor v Barron Knights
Events will Frustrate - Essential thing Unavailable
Taylor v Cadwell
Events will Frustrate - Fundamental event doesn’t occur
Krell v Henry
Events will Frustrate - Government intervention
Met Water Board v Dick Kerr
Events will Frustrate - Illegality of the Contract
Fibrosa v Fairbairn
Events WILL Frustrate - Delay – Consider Length and Time Obligation in Performance – Delay will only Frustrate the Contract if it has become Radically Different
Met Water Board v Dick Kerr
Events will NOT Frustrate - Essential person Unavailable for Insignificant period of time
.
Events will NOT Frustrate - Event is Not directly related to Objective of the Contract
Herne Bay v Hutton (contrast with Krell v Henry)
Events will NOT Frustrate - Event was / should have been Foreseen
Davis Contractors v Fareham (Unless, Parties made no provisions for the event in the Contract – The Eugenia)
Events will NOT Frustrate - Prices Increase / Contract become more Expensive / Difficult to Perform
National Carriers v Panalpina
Events will NOT Frustrate - If Event is in anyway Self-Induced – Any Element of Choice will Prevent Frustration
Super Servant Two
Events will NOT Frustrate - Delay and Leases of Land (not being able to use property for 2 out of 10 yrs. seen as Not Frustrating)
Davis Contractors v Fareham
If the cause of the frustration is unknown – Onus in on Party rebutting frustration claim to prove fault of other Party
Joseph Constantine Steamship v Imperial Smelting
Effect if the Contract is Frustrated - Common Law
- Contract is automatically Discharged / Terminated
- Fibrosa v Fairbairn - Future Obligations Cease
- Krell v Henry - No Parties are in Breach
Effect if the Contract is Frustrated - Statutory Rules
Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 will apply unless excluded by a term in a contract - s.2(5) - s.1(2) Courts discretion to avoid unjust enrichment - Gamerco SA v ICM S.1(3) - Valuable benefit - Benefit must survive the Frustrating event - BP Exploration v Hunt
Effect if the Contract is NOT Frustrated
- Type of Breach
- Remoteness Rules - Hadley v Baxendale - (1) Arises naturally from the breach (2) Reasonable to suppose it was within the reasonable contemplation of the parties at the time of the contract
- Measure of Damages
- Mitigation - British Westinghouse