A contract may be frustrated where there is a
change in circumstances, after the contract was
made, which is not the fault of either of the
parties, which renders the contract impossible
to perform or deprives the contract of its
commercial purpose
Where a contract is found to be frustrated, each
party is discharged from future obligations under
the contract and neither party may sue for breach.
Examples of Frustration
Destruction
of subject
matter
Taylor v
Caldwell
FACTS: Claimant hired out a music
hall to hold 4 concerts. A week
before the first concert was due to
take place the music hall was
destroyed by an accidental fire.
The claimant sought to bring an
action for breach of contract for
failing to provide the hall and
claiming damages for the
expenses incurred.
HELD: The claimant's action
for breach of contract failed.
The contract had been
frustrated as the fire meant
the contract was impossible to
perform.
Personal
incapacity will
generally render
the contract
frustrated
Condor v
Baron
Knights
FACTS: A 16 year old agreed to
play the drums for the
defendant band for 7 nights a
week for 5 years. The claimant
suffered a mental breakdown
and was told by his doctor that
he should not perform more
than 4 nights per week. The
band dismissed him. He
brought a claim for wrongful
dismissal.
HELD: The claimant's action was
unsuccessful as his medical condition
made it impossible for him to perform
his contractual obligations and the
contract was thus frustrated.
Where the contract
becomes illegal to
perform it will frustrate
the contract
Fibrosa
Spolka v
Fairbairn
FACTS: A English company that manufactured
textile machinery agreed to supply some
machines to a Polish company. The machines
were to be delivered in 3-4 months. £1,600 was
payable up front and the balance of £3,200
payable on delivery. 1st of Sept Germany
invaded Poland and on 3rd Sept Great Britain
declared war on Germany. Orders in Council
made Poland an enemy territory making it
illegal for British companies to trade with
Poland.
HELD: The contract was
frustrated as it was no
longer possible to perform
the contract because of the
supervening illegality.
Where a contract
can not be
performed in the
specified manner
Nicholl
and
Knight v
Ashton,
Eldridge &
Co
FACTS: The parties agreed that a
cargo of cotton seed was to be
shipped from Egypt to England.
The contract specified the ship,
The Orlando, which was to carry
the cargo. This ship became
damaged and was in for repairs
when the contract was due to be
performed.
HELD: By naming the exact ship
which was to carry the cargo,
the contract was frustrated as
it was impossible for this ship
to carry the cargo within the
contractually agreed period.
A contract may also be
frustrated where it is
deprived of its
commercial purpose
Krell v Henry
FACTS: The defendant hired a flat on
Pall Mall for the sole purpose of
viewing King Edward VII's coronation.
The price agreed was £75 for two days.
The defendant paid £25 deposit. Due
to illness of the King the coronation
was cancelled. Consequently, the
defendant did not use the flat. The
claimant sought to claim the
outstanding £50.
HELD: The contract was
frustrated as cancellation
of the procession
deprived it of its
commercial purpose. The
claimant's action for
breach of contract was
thus unsuccessful.
However, the contract
must be deprived of the
whole commercial purpose
to amount to frustration:
Herne Bay Steam
Boat v Hutton
FACTS: The defendant hired out the claimant's
steamship. The purpose was to take passengers
to view the Naval Review which (part of King
Edward VII's coronation). The defendants were
also offering a day’s cruise for the passengers.
The Naval Review was cancelled as the King was
ill. The defendant did not use the steamship
and the claimant brought an action for the
agreed contract price. The defendant argued
the contract had become frustrated due to the
cancellation of the Naval Review.
HELD: The contract was
NOT frustrated. The
contract had not been
deprived of its sole
commercial purpose as it
was still possible to
perform the days cruise.
The Naval Review was not
the only commercial
purpose of the contract.
Examples of
No
Frustration
A contract will
not be frustrated
when:
It is more
difficult or
expensive to
perform
Davis
Contractors v
Fareham UDC
FACTS: Davis Contractors agreed to build
78 houses for Fareham UDC within 8
months for an agreed price of £85,000. Due
to a shortage in skilled labour the contract
took 22 months to complete and was more
expensive than anticipated. Davis
Contractors were paid the contractually
agreed price but brought an action for
more money based on the fact that the
contract had become frustrated.
HELD: The contract was not
frustrated. The fact that a
contract becomes more
difficult to perform or not so
profitable is not sufficient to
amount to frustration. It was
still possible to perform the
contrac
Impossibility of
performance is the
fault of either of the
parties
Maritime National Fish v Ocean
Trawlers
FACTS: The claimant owned fishing vessels
1 was chartered to the defendants. The
vessels were all fitted with otter trawler
nets that required licences to be held. The
claimant applied for 5 licences but was
only granted 3. He had to name which
vessels the licence would be used on. He
named the vessels and excluded the vessel
which the defendant was using. So the
defendant was unable to use the vessel.
The claimant sued the defendant.
HELD: The contract was not
frustrated since the claimant
had chosen to keep the three
licences granted for himself
rather than using one to fulfil
his contractual obligation. He
had therefore induced the
frustrating event and was
therefore in breach of
contract.
Where there
is a force
majeure clause
Jackson v The Union
Marine Insurance Co
Ltd
FACTS: The plaintiff ship owner, contracted
under a charterparty to proceed with all
dispatch to Newport. He insured the cargo.
The ship ran aground before the cargo could
be collected, and was delayed. The charterers
threw up the charterparty and contracted
elsewhere for the delivery of the goods. The
plaintiff claimed under his insurance (force
majeure clause).
HELD: The delay had been so long
as to put an end to the
contractual obligations.
Where the
frustrating event
could be foreseen
Walton Harvey Ltd v
Walker & Homfrays
Ltd
FACTS: A hotel owner entered a contract
with an advertising agency enabling them
to put illuminated adverts on the roof of
their hotel. The hotel was then purchased
by the Local Authority and demolished. The
advertising agency sued for breach of
contract and the hotel argued the contract
had become frustrated.
HELD: The contract was not frustrated
as the hotel owners were aware that
the Local Authority were looking to
purchase the hotel at the time they
entered the contract. They should
have foreseen the fact that this could
happen in the life time of the contract
and made provision in the contract
for such an eventuality.
Affects of Frustration
Where a contract is found to
be frustrated, both parties
are released from their
obligations under the
contract and neither party
may sue for breach.
The allocation of loss is decided
by the Law Reform (Frustrated
Contracts) Act 1943. This
provides:
s.1(2) All money payable under the contract
ceases to be payable and any money already
paid may be recovered. Where expenses have
been incurred this may be deducted from the
amounts payable or paid. This is at the
discretion of the court and is subject to what is
just and equitable in the circumstances of the
case. There is no provision allowing expenses to
be recovered which exceed the amounts paid or
payable.
S. 1(3) - Where a valuable
benefit has been conferred this
must be paid for.