Analyzing the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 Effectiveness

This essay provides a detailed analysis of the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943, examining its effectiveness in resolving disputes arising from frustrated contracts. It begins with an introduction to contract law and the concept of frustration, then delves into the specifics of the Act, including key sections and their impact on allocating losses and determining rights. The discussion incorporates relevant case law, such as Taylor v Caldwell and Fibrosa Spolka v Fairbairn, to illustrate the application of the Act in various scenarios. The essay further explores the test of frustration as defined in Davis Contractors Limited v Fareham Urban District Council, highlighting the high burden of proof required to establish frustration. It concludes by emphasizing the Act's role in providing a legal framework for addressing unforeseen events that render contract performance impossible, while also noting the limitations and the courts' cautious approach to applying the doctrine of frustration.

LAW OF CONTRACT

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................1
QUESTION.....................................................................................................................................1
The Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943, has proved to be a useful aid, in the solving
of disputes where a contract has become frustrated. Discuss the accuracy, of the above
statement......................................................................................................................................1
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................6

INTRODUCTION
Contract laws are those perspectives which has been formed in order to make agreements
formed in more effective way. Under these laws proper structure has been created over making
business perform with more effectiveness. Also contract law has made business organization
perform its operating with other companies with an strategic approach towards it. Through
contract law various aspects in relation to business has been covered within contract law making
organization establish strong system leading upon creating legal development within contract.
Also these laws are important as it leads over making contracts formed as per legal standards of
an country. In this report main discussion is related upon contract and Law Reform(Frustrated
Contracts)Act 1943. Through this discussion is done upon various aspects related to contract of
frustration.
MAIN BODY
QUESTION
The Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943, has proved to be a useful aid, in the solving of
disputes where a contract has become frustrated. Discuss the accuracy, of the above
statement.
Frustration of contract is based over those perspective which leads over making contract
terminated under various circumstances. The situation is based over making contract become
null and void as per the situation that has taken place within it. Under contract of frustration
direct termination of contract takes place based over commercial and corporate contract. Also
under it contract is found to based over an act which is unforeseeable in nature causing breach
take place(McCunn, 2019). Before, introducing the act there use to regular normal proceedings
within contract law and frustration was not given importance. The rules that were followed is
based over common law principle. Thus the requirement of forming this legislation done as per
legal requirement The allocation of loss is governed by the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts)
Act of 1943. Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943: this act has been created by the
parliament of United Kingdom which leads over hovering liability and rights of parties included
within frustration. The act is based over common law at the time when monetary reforms are
involved within it. Also the act works upon common law over time allowing parties to become
frustrated within contract. As per the act frustration of contract leads over recovering money
1

which is paid over illegal violation of obligations. Further, the act is based upon Chandler v
Webster as per the case rules are restricted over rights of claimant seeking upon making
payment done within the event of making contract frustrated. The facts of case states that
Webster has agreed to pay rent to Chandler for the room which has been made revenant over the
agreement taken place within them. As per the facts of case it was held by court that claim
cannot be made over those portion which are agreed upon agreement. The rule is wide range of
general which was identified by Law Revision Committee proposed changes in its Seventh
Interim Report. The report says that arbiter rule making claimant seek monetary reforms requires
to pay. This defines about act's objectives over providing protection in relation to Monterey
reforms causing contractual agreement under as per its circumstances making contract attain
frustration(Li, Liu and Motiwalla, 2021).
Main changes did it make to the law: This is one of the most important part of act
which is related to above defined case making contract of frustration become more relevant in its
terms. The act made changes in order to ensure about sum which has been paid partially upon
recovery under that circumstances which makes contract not performed. This makes benefits
take place in unfair manner to another party. Key Sections :Section 1 of the Law Reform
(Frustrated Contracts) Act of 1943 it is one of the most important section which is based over
changes through which rights of parties has been justified in relation over contract of frustration.
As per the section the act is applied over any kind of contract that has been governed within
English contract law. Also, the section defines about those charges which is recoverable over
claims. The section allows payee to take portion of money over the expenses taken place due to
act of frustration. Through this contract is carried within justified manner making frustration take
place reading the claim. (McKavanagh, 2018). Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943,
section 1 (4) is based upon estimating expense in relation to any party performing contract the
court includes those sum of circumstances which are reasonable upon expenses taken place. The
act has justified by dealing over situation within this one part obtains benefits over another
regarding the monetary payment taken place due to frustration. As per the section 2 of act
specific circumstances has taken place over logistics of applied within the action causing
frustration take place. This the act lead upon forming more relevant rules in relation over such
circumstances taken place within the contract of frustration. Also under the act various kinds of
circumstances has been taken into account allowing parties deal with such situations causing any
2

kind of frustration taken place. Thus act has been applied over various disputes which has been
taking place due to contracts of frustration between parties. The act made new and better legal
structure created through cases decided within act for supporting its justification over purpose
upon which frustration of contract takes place. In section 2(2) of the act Crown is given power
over solving disputes related to frustration. The section 3(2) has defined about courts power in
relation to frustration taking place within contract. In order to justify this case is BP Exploration
Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt, in the case court held that clause can be interpretative and applied
within an case as per the legal authority upon it. There are various relevant cases in relation to
frustration which are. Taylor v Caldwell in this case claimant rented music hall over four grand
concerts and spend money as per the requirements and time was given for its organizing. The
music hall was destroyed due to fire a week before first concerts. No the claimant attempted to
file breach of contract upon claims in relation to damage over expenses failing to provide the hall
on time. In this case court held that contract of frustration takes place but situation was
accidental making frustration null and void thus claim cannot be made. Condor v Baron
Knights: In this case contract was signed by 16 year old for playing drums for defendant band
seven nights a week over five years. This made claimant cause mental breakdown and advise by
doctor for not working more then four nights per week. Thus he was dismissed from the band
and filed claim of wrongful termination. In this case court held that contractual obligation
rendered making contract null and void(Pardayev, 2020). Fibrosa Spolka v Fairbairn In the case
English company manufacturing textile machinery has agreed over making supply done to polish
company. The machines were suppose over arriving within 3-4 months. The first payment was
done of £1,600 and remaining payment £3,200 was done over delivery time. The polish
organization paid £1000 which is part of initial payment of contract. Then war broke between
Germany and Poland resulting in causing problem within trade. Since war brought lot of
negative aspects and is specific situation that cannot be foreseen. This made situation accrued
within the contract making contract not take place or could not be completed. Thus contract
become null void due the war situation ad court held that frustration cannot take place as
circumstances were not valid. Nicholl and Knight v Ashton, Eldridge & Co in the case facts says
that cargo of cotton seeds were shipped form Egypt to England. As ship was travelling damage
took place which caused due within the delivery making contract to be null void. In this case
court held that frustration has taken place and monetary damages are liable to be paid by party
3

making delivery delayed as per contract. Thus court order that as per frustration act contract has
taken place upon the contract making claim to be attained. Herne Bay Steam Boat v Hutton: in
this case the steamship was rented and contract purpose was to be transported over paying
passengers within Naval Review related to King Edward VII's celebration. Also the case has
been offering over passenger's day upon cruse and its was analyzed that by Naval Review about
King's illness. Also defendant made steamship filed claim over agreed price within contract
taken place. The defendant made claim which rendered as null and void by court resulting in
cancellation of Naval Review. Also contract was not dismissed and cruise was not damaged
which made frustration take place as per act. Further, court said hat Naval review was not valid
as the illness can be cured within the ship and does not harm public.
Frustration of contract takes place over unforeseen events taking place within an contract.
As the contract making performance impossible making contract to be frustrated in more
effective way. In this an contract is frustrated applying over specific circumstances taken
place(Swain, 2021). The contracts has been able to deal with circumstances having less risk
taking place over operations performed through an commercial contract. In this accidental claims
are also analysed happening due to special circumstances. Then contract of frustration deal with
contract disputes involving money within it. Frustration of contract is used over making claims
to be made within contract. This has bee defining about various conditions taking place due to
decisions formed by court. In principle, the Court agreed that these circumstances could give rise
to the frustration of a contract. However, the leases included a “hell or high water” clause which
expressly provided that the lessee’s obligation to pay rent (and make other payments) would be
absolute and unconditional, irrespective of, amongst other things, the unavailability of the
aircraft. As a result, the Court determined that the intervening events did not cause the contract to
be "radically different" from what was anticipated at the outset. Frustration of contract has been
justified by courts of UK as it helps in making operational lease to be justified in more effective
way. It has been making frustration take place in order to make contract null void in this all kinds
of law are included which helps upon making disputes related over property contracts solved
with more effectiveness. The courts has helped in forming various kinds of perspectives which
are justified as per risk taking place between parties. As per the view point of court doctrine of
frustration has been formed dealing with various kinds of ideas taking place with purpose over
specified contract taking place making implication proved in more effective manner under
4

special circumstances. The frustration doctrine will only be used on rare occasions. Contracting
parties should not rely on it as an automatic remedy in the event of an unprecedented event, such
as a global pandemic. While the Courts have acknowledged the possibility of a lease or contract
being frustrated, they have consistently stated that the burden of proof for proving frustration
remains high.
Another important aspects is based over test of frustration which has been defined within
the case of Davis Contractors Limited v Fareham Urban District Council as per facts of case it
has been defined that an construction company has come into contract with another company for
extending of rail network within eastern sub. This contract was formed in order to make
construction done more effectively and validity of contract existed as there are case of frustration
taken place(Tulti, 2019). In this case High court held that contract was null and void as in this
situation that has been created is based over injunction which does not amounts to frustration as
the contract taken place has caused construction done within surrounding circumstances(Tulti,
2019). In this case court analysed the situation which showed that working methods is required
to be changed as the current methods does not justifies validity of working.
It has been marked out that contract of frustration has helped in solving disputes as it
makes those unforgeable events to be identified which were not predicted. As per the frustration
of contract there are certain conditions which may cause contract take place within special
circumstances. Also frustration of contract is based upon defining about contractual condition
leading towards unforeseeable condition taking place(Swain, 2021). Frustration of contract is an
important concept of contract law which provides claims to be made upon rare conditions.
Frustration has various limits in which it is not applied which makes it solve disputes to limited
extent. The decisions taken by court within the case of frustration it can be analysed that courts
are required to study case in proper manner. Frustration of contract is an important aspects which
is used over solving disputes of different categories justified for making contract attain more
validity upon its terms. Frustration is an important term which helped courts in solving various
questions in relation over conditions existing between parties. Through frustration various kinds
of disputes has been solved which makes contract taking place within unique circumstances.
Frustration has leads upon solving disputes related to risk and damages taken place upon it.
Disputes are solved in more logical manner by Frustration of contract.
5

CONCLUSION
From the above discussion it can be concluded that contract laws means those rules and
regulations which are developed over making contract established in more effective way. These
laws are based upon different aspects related to contract which is used in order to make relevant
perspective over frustrated contract to be marked out. The contract occurs only under special
circumstances which cannot be foreseen. In this essay things discussed is related to contract of
frustration has been discussed with relevant case laws that shows relevancy over tendency of
solving dispute leading towards contract of frustration.
REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Bajpai, A., 2019. Critical Analysis of “The Payment and Settlements Act, 2007”. Journal of
Banking and Insurance Law, 2(2).
Bocsi, G.T. and et. al., 2020. Developing Pathology Measures for the Quality Payment Program
—Part I: A Quest for Meaningful Measures. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine,
144(6), pp.686-696.
Carlson, A.R. and Taylor, J.A., 2021. Discussion: Considerations for Payment Bundling in Cleft
Care. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 147(4). pp.933-934.
Hoque, M.E., Hashim, N.M.H.N. and Azmi, M.H.B., 2018. Moderating effects of marketing
communication and financial consideration on customer attitude and intention to purchase
Islamic banking products: A conceptual framework. Journal of Islamic Marketing.
Keppert, M. and et. al., 2018. Red-clay ceramic powders as geopolymer precursors:
Consideration of amorphous portion and CaO content. Applied Clay Science, 161, pp.82-89.
Li, X.B., Liu, X. and Motiwalla, L., 2021. Valuing Personal Data with Privacy Consideration.
Decision Sciences. 52(2). pp.393-426.
McCunn, J., 2019. The Contra Proferentem Rule: Contract Law’s Great Survivor. Oxford
Journal of Legal Studies. 39(3). pp.483-506.
McKavanagh, L., 2018. Contract law: Out with the trash!: ACCC acts on unfair contract terms.
Proctor, The.38(4). pp.26-27.
Pardayev, A., 2020. The Snake Gorge is some consideration of the formation and historical
significance of the Iron Gate: Jizzakh State Pedagogical Institute. Архив Научных
Публикаций JSPI.
Swain, W., 2021. Equitable Doctrine, Fairness and the Law of Contract in Australia. Australian
Contract Law in the 21st Century. Editors: Eldridge J, Pilkington. 174. p.191.
Tulti, H., 2019. The Unconscionability Doctrine in Electronic Standard Form Contracting: A
Critical Study of Libyan Contract Law.
6