Contract Law - Frustration - Ten key cases 2017-18 PDF

Preview

Summary

FrustraionParadine v Jane (1647)At common law, historic posiion was that there was no general doctrine of frustraion in law. (Paries should plan in the contract for unexpected events.)Taylor v Caldwell (1863)No liability to pay damages. Contract was frustrated by the ire as contract impossible to pe...

Description

Frustration

Paradine v Jane (1647) At common law, historic position was that there was no general doctrine of frustration in law. (Parties should plan in the contract for unexpected events.) Taylor v Caldwell (1863) No liability to pay damages. Contract was frustrated by the fire as contract impossible to perform. Krell v Henry (1903) Contract had been frustrated. The purpose of the contract (ie to view the procession) could no longer be achieved. Herne Bay Steam Boat Co v Hutton (1903) Contract was not frustrated. One of the purposes of the contract (ie to cruise around the fleet) was still possible. Davis Contractors Ltd v Fareham UDC (1956) Contract not frustrated. Not enough to show the contract had become more expensive or onerous for one party to fulfil. “Frustration occurs [when] without default of either party a contractual obligation has become incapable of being performed because the circumstances in which performance is called for would render it a thing radically different from that which was undertaken by the contract.” National Carriers v Panalpina (Northern) Ltd (1981) Approved of Lord Radcliffe’s test of “radically different”. (re a road closure making a warehouse unusable for 2 years did not frustrate the 10 year lease)

1

Frustration

The Sea Angel (2007) Considers to what extent the event must be unexpected/unforeseen. Metropolitan Water Board v Dick Kerr and Co Ltd (1918) The event in question must not have already been dealt with by the contractual terms. The Super Servant Two (1990) A party cannot argue for frustration if they were the cause of the event in question ie it is self-induced. Amalgamated Investment & Property Co v John Walker & Sons Ltd (1977) Event post contract so law of frustration (not law of mistake) applies. But on the facts, not frustrated as the listing of the building did not make the contract radically different.

2...