The Discharge of the Contract, Essay Example

Clause: “The contractor agrees that he is fully informed regarding all of the conditions affecting work to be done and labor and materials to be furnished for the completion of the contract and that his information was secured by personal investigation and research and not from the Commission or its estimates and that he will make no claim against the Commission.
In fact, the area over which the road was to be build was under heavy snow at the time, and the temperature was very low. The description of the property proved to be inaccurate, there being much more muskeg than indicated. After these facts became known, the contractor claimed to be excused from the contract, alleging that it had been frustrated and that what was required amounted to an entirely different contract.” (The Law and Business Administration in Canada).

In order for a contract to be deemed frustrated it has to be deemed impossible to be performed by some unforeseeable event beyond the control of the promissory. In the instance of this scenario, the promissory, the contractor, could not possibly know the true conditions of the property because of the snow and the very low temperatures thus the description of the property could not be accurate. The fact was later discovered there was much more muskeg than indicated which would change the conditions of the property as initially indicated. Supervening events beyond the control of either contracting party makes it impossible for either side or any side to perform their obligations under the contract as seen in Paradine v Jane (1647) Aleyn 26. There was a need to show the fundamental part of the contract was destroyed. Taylor v Caldwell (1863) 3B & S 826 it was distinguished there could only be loss recovered though positive contracts where performance was guaranteed but where one was subject to an implied condition as in this case where a performance was subject to the hall not burning down. The defendants won based on the premise it was not their fault the music hall burned down a day prior to the musical performance. This case followed the positive principle set forth in Paradine v. Jane. If part of the contract had already commenced then the contract cannot be totally discharged as seen in Chandler v Webster (1904) 1 KB 493. The effect of the contract could not be to totally discharge and recover quasi-contract.

Now that we have discussed the possibilities of what could happen with frustration and discharge of a contract, it still remains that the contract had not been performed hence the contract could be regarded as frustrated and totally discharged because it was discovered by an unforeseeable event beyond the control of the promissory that the true conditions of the property did not exist at the time the contract was made. Either party has the right to frustration and discharge of the contractual obligation based on these facts.

Works Cited

The Law and Business Administration in Canada 12th Edition, Ch.13, p. 280

Richards, P. Law of Contract London: UK Pearson Education, 2009