Skip to main content

Discharge by Frustration in Contract Act

 Discharge by Frustration in Contract Act

By Shweta Nair


A contract may be impossible to be performed however, there are two types of impossibility: 


  1. Initial Impossibility- i.e., at the time of entering into the contract itself, it was impossible to be performed. In such a case, the question of discharge does not arise because the contract itself is void in the first place. 

  2. Subsequent Impossibility- These are cases where the contract was very much valid when it was entered into but subsequently something happened which rendered it impossible to be performed. This is called discharge of supervening impossibility. It is also said that the contract is frustrated. Hence, this is known as the doctrine of frustration. 


A contract may be frustrated in the following ways: 


  1. Destruction of the subject matter of the contract – If the very premise on which the contract is based gets destroyed then the contract will get discharged due to supervening impossibility. 


Case- Taylor v. Caldwell (Musical Hall Case)- It was held that liability cannot be imposed on the defendants. Blackburn J observed that there is an implied term in the contract that the concert hall would subsist at the time of the contract. This term made the basis of the law of frustration. 


Illustration: X enters into a contract with Y to sell his car. The car gets stolen before anything further is done. The contract shall be discharged. 


  1. Cancellation of an expected event – If the whole contract is based on an expected event to happen and such event is cancelled due to unavoidable reasons, not in control of the parties then the contract shall be frustrated. 


Case – Krell v. Henry (Coronation Case), it was held that defendant is exempted from performance because his purpose that is to watch the coronation of the king, as understood by both the parties for entering into the contract was frustrated.  


  1. Death or Permanent incapacity of the parties- However, it is to be noted that only contracts of a permanent nature shall be frustrated in the event of death of the party, otherwise the contract devolves to the legal heirs and representatives of the party who has died. 


  1. Change of Law- If the contract is rendered impossible due to a subsequent change in the law of the land, it is discharged. 


Illustration: A enters into a contract with B for taking his wine-shop business for conducting. Subsequently, the government of the state declares prohibition as selling of liquor in the state is no longer possible. The contract would be discharged.  


  1. Vis Major (Act of God) – These are cases which become impossible due to natural calamities such as earthquakes, floods, tsunami etc. 


  1. Outbreak of War – During times of war, many a contract are suspended if the situation prevents its execution. 


Exceptions to Frustration: 


In the following cases, the contract may appear to have become impossible. However, it would not be discharged. 


  1. Commercial Impossibility- If the contract is no longer commercially viable that does absolve the affected party from their responsibility to perform it. Such a party would have to bear the loss and yet fulfil his obligation. 


  1. Self-induced Frustration- If the contract has become impossible due to some fault of the party himself then he cannot claim frustration. 


Case- Maritime National Fish v. Oceanic Trawlers Ltd. 


Case- Avery v. Bowden 

Facts- The owner of a cargo entered into a contract with a labour contractor for the unloading of a ship on a particular day. He was given 3 days’ time to unload the ship however when the ship arrived at the destination, the contractor expressed his inability due to some unrest among his labourers. The cargo owner however decided to wait as 3 days’ time was available. However, on the very second day, war broke out. It was held that the cargo owner has lost his remedy as the contract has become frustrated. 




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree