Frustration

Question 1

Test for frustration: circumstances that render performance radically different from what contract intended

Answer 1

Davis Contractors v Foreham Urban DC

Question 2

Frustration through Impossibility: factory accidentally burnt down

Answer 2

Appleby v Myers

Question 3

Frustration through Impossibility: ship chartered for 12 months seized for 6 - frustration.

Answer 3

Bank Line v Arthur Capel

Question 4

Not frustration through impossibility when seized for 3 of 5 year chartering period

Answer 4

FA Tamplin v Anglo-Mexican

Question 5

Frustration through impossibility

Answer 5

The Chrysalis

Question 6

Voyage increase from 108 to 138 days not enough for frustration through impossibility

Answer 6

The Eugenia

Question 7

Frustration through illegality

Answer 7

Fibrosa v Fairbairn; Metropolitan Water Board v Dick, Kerr

Question 8

Frustration through purpose

Answer 8

Krell v Henry

Question 9

No frustration through purpose

Answer 9

Herne Bay Steam Boat Company v Hulton

Question 10

Mere fact that performance is more onerous does not guarantee frustration

Answer 10

Lord Riskill, The Nema

Question 11

Modern assessment of frustration through multi-factorial assessment: contract, matrix of fact, knowledge, assumptions, nature of supervening events etc.

Answer 11

The Sea Angel, developed in Iran Shipping Lines v Steamship Mutual

Question 12

Fact that something is unforeseen not key to frustration

Answer 12

Lord Denning in The Eugenia

Question 13

Act of Parliament a foreseeable risk

Answer 13

Metropolitan Water Board v Dick, Kerr

Question 14

If frustration is self-induced, no frustration

Answer 14

The Super Servant Two

Question 15

If cause unclear, up to claimant to establish negligence resulting in frustration

Answer 15

Joseph Constantine Steamship v Imperial Smelting

Question 16

Self-inducement of frustration only relevant to claimant

Answer 16

Shepherd v Jerrom

Question 17

Effects of Frustration:

1. Terminates contract from date of frustration;
2. Parties discharged from obligations from after frustration (but not before);
3. s. 1(2) - money paid before F recoverable, money payable ceases to be payable (further than Firbrosa v Fairbairn;
4. s. 1(4) - party who did work before F to benefit of other party may claim compensation

Answer 17

Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943

Question 18

s. 1(4) interpreted so that if frustration reduces valuable benefit to £0, the provider of benefit has no claim for any sum

Answer 18

Per Goff J in BP v Hunt