Termination Of Contract For Frustration In Houston
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
As mentioned earlier, frustration is a rare remedy in contract law. Since it discharges the contract, it effectively terminates the parties' future obligations. However, it's important to remember that frustration isn't a cure-all solution and not all contractual disputes can be resolved through this doctrine.
1) Destruction of subject matter: The doctrine of impossibilty applies with full force " where the actual and specific subject matter of the contract has ceased to exist". When the subject matter of a contract is destroyed without any fault of the parties to the contract, the contract is discharged.
The frustration of a contract refers to a legal concept when unforeseen events or circumstances occur that make it impossible or difficult for the parties to fulfill them. These unforeseen circumstances fundamentally alter the terms of the agreement, making it unenforceable, commercially unviable, or impossible.
In some cases a contract will be brought to an end because of a supervening event that is beyond the control of the parties; for example, a contract between A and B, whereby B agrees to hire A's theatre on a particular night may be frustrated if, as a result of a terrorist act the theatre is destroyed prior to the date ...
For example, if a law changes that make selling cars illegal, then contracts that involve cars will likely be frustrated. This is because the performance of that contract cannot be performed, by either party to a contract, and this arises from the illegality prohibiting performance.
The Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 265 provides that frustration of purpose may excuse performance when, so long as the language or circumstances do not indicate the contrary: (1) a party's principal purpose is substantially frustrated; (2) such party is not at fault; and (3) the contract was made on the basic ...
At common law, where frustration is established the contract is terminated automatically (in futuro); there is no option to discharge or to perform and, at common law, the loss resulting from the termination lies where it falls (although there are limited exceptions to that rule).
3 Importantly, to give rise to frustration, the triggering event must cause disruption to contractual performance that is permanent (or at least substantially so), as opposed to temporary or transient. 4 The remedy for frustration is to discharge both parties of their obligations to perform on a going-forward basis.
