# What do you mean by Supervening impossibility and how can it happen? Discuss the effects of such impossibility and state the rights and liabilities of the concerned parties?
Answer:
A contract, which at the time it was entered into, was capable of being performed may subsequently become impossible to perform or unlawful. In such cases the contract becomes void. This is known as the doctrine of supervening impossibility. It is also known the doctrine of frustration. For example, where after making a contract of marriage, one of the parties goes mad, or where a contract is made for the import of goods and the import is forbidden by a govt. order, or where a singer contracts to sing and becomes too ill to do so, the contract in each case becomes void.
The second paragraph of section 56 lays down, "A contract to do an act which, after the contract is made, becomes impossible, or, by reason of some event which the promisor could not prevent, unlawful becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful."
The principle of fraustation or supervening impossibility of performance is applicable to a great variety of contracts. It is not possible to lay down an exhaustive list of situations in which the doctrine is going to be applied. Yet the following grounds of frustration have become well-established.
1. Destruction of subject matter: A contract is discharged if a specific thing which is essential to the performance of the contract is destroyed. The doctrine of impossibility applies with full force 'where the actual and specific subject-matter of the contract has ceased to exist.
Taylor Vs. Cladwell is the best example of this class. There, A music hall was let for a series of contracts on certain days. The hall was burnt down before the date of the first concert. The contract becomes void.
2. Change of law: A contract is discharged when its performance becomes impossible on account of a change in the existing law. Persons generally contract on the basis of the law existing at the time of the contract. If this law is subsequently changed, they are not expected to honor their obligations by committing a violation of the law. For example- X who was governed by Hindu Law and already had a wife, promises to marry Y. Then the Special Marriage Act is passed prohibiting polygamous marriage. The contract to marry becomes void.
3. Death or Incapacity of party: Where the nature or terms of a contract require personal performance by the promisor, his death or incapacity puts an end to the contract.
In case of Robinson Vs. Davison, 'There was a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant's wife, who was an eminent pianist, that she should play the piano at a concert to be given by the plaintiff on a specified day. On the morning of the day She informed the plaintiff that she was too ill to attend the concert. The concert had to be postponed and the plaintiff lost a some of money. The court said that, the contract is discharged because the player could have insisted on performing when she was unfit to do so.
4. Intervention of war: Intervention of war or warlike conditions in the performance of a contract has often created difficult questions. The closure of Suez Canal, interrupted the performance of many contracts.
A contract entered into during war with an alien enemy is void ab initio.
A contract entered into before the war commenced between citizens of countries subsequently at war, remains suspended during the pendency of the war. After the termination of the war, the contract revives and may be enforced.
5. Non-Occurrence of contemplated event: If a state of things on the basis of which a contract was made, does not exist or occur, the contract is discharged. Somrtimes the performance of a contract remains entirely possible, but owing to the non-occurrence of an event contemplated by both parties as the reason for the contract, the value of the performance is destroyed. Krell Vs. Henry is an apt illustration. There, H hired a room from K for two days with the object of using the room to view the coronation procession of Edward vii. Owing to the king's illness the procession was abandoned. Held, that the contract was discharged and H was excused from paying rent for the room as the existence of the procession was the basis of the contract.
The effect of Supervening Impossibility:
1. Section 56(para 2) provides that when the performance of a contract becomes subsequently impossibe or illegal, the contract becomes void.
2. Section 65 provides that when a contract becomes void, any person who has received any advantage under it must restore it, or make compensation for it, to the person from whom he received it.
3. Section 56 (para 3) provides that, 'where one person has promised to do something which he knew, or with reasonable diligence, might have known, and which the promisee did not know to be impossible or unlawful, such promisor for any loss which such promisee sustains through the non-performance of the promise. For example- p contracts to B being already married to C, and being forbidden by the law to which he is subject to practice polygamy. P must make compensation to B for any loss caused to her by non-performance of his promise.
Answer:
A contract, which at the time it was entered into, was capable of being performed may subsequently become impossible to perform or unlawful. In such cases the contract becomes void. This is known as the doctrine of supervening impossibility. It is also known the doctrine of frustration. For example, where after making a contract of marriage, one of the parties goes mad, or where a contract is made for the import of goods and the import is forbidden by a govt. order, or where a singer contracts to sing and becomes too ill to do so, the contract in each case becomes void.
The second paragraph of section 56 lays down, "A contract to do an act which, after the contract is made, becomes impossible, or, by reason of some event which the promisor could not prevent, unlawful becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful."
The principle of fraustation or supervening impossibility of performance is applicable to a great variety of contracts. It is not possible to lay down an exhaustive list of situations in which the doctrine is going to be applied. Yet the following grounds of frustration have become well-established.
1. Destruction of subject matter: A contract is discharged if a specific thing which is essential to the performance of the contract is destroyed. The doctrine of impossibility applies with full force 'where the actual and specific subject-matter of the contract has ceased to exist.
Taylor Vs. Cladwell is the best example of this class. There, A music hall was let for a series of contracts on certain days. The hall was burnt down before the date of the first concert. The contract becomes void.
2. Change of law: A contract is discharged when its performance becomes impossible on account of a change in the existing law. Persons generally contract on the basis of the law existing at the time of the contract. If this law is subsequently changed, they are not expected to honor their obligations by committing a violation of the law. For example- X who was governed by Hindu Law and already had a wife, promises to marry Y. Then the Special Marriage Act is passed prohibiting polygamous marriage. The contract to marry becomes void.
3. Death or Incapacity of party: Where the nature or terms of a contract require personal performance by the promisor, his death or incapacity puts an end to the contract.
In case of Robinson Vs. Davison, 'There was a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant's wife, who was an eminent pianist, that she should play the piano at a concert to be given by the plaintiff on a specified day. On the morning of the day She informed the plaintiff that she was too ill to attend the concert. The concert had to be postponed and the plaintiff lost a some of money. The court said that, the contract is discharged because the player could have insisted on performing when she was unfit to do so.
4. Intervention of war: Intervention of war or warlike conditions in the performance of a contract has often created difficult questions. The closure of Suez Canal, interrupted the performance of many contracts.
A contract entered into during war with an alien enemy is void ab initio.
A contract entered into before the war commenced between citizens of countries subsequently at war, remains suspended during the pendency of the war. After the termination of the war, the contract revives and may be enforced.
5. Non-Occurrence of contemplated event: If a state of things on the basis of which a contract was made, does not exist or occur, the contract is discharged. Somrtimes the performance of a contract remains entirely possible, but owing to the non-occurrence of an event contemplated by both parties as the reason for the contract, the value of the performance is destroyed. Krell Vs. Henry is an apt illustration. There, H hired a room from K for two days with the object of using the room to view the coronation procession of Edward vii. Owing to the king's illness the procession was abandoned. Held, that the contract was discharged and H was excused from paying rent for the room as the existence of the procession was the basis of the contract.
The effect of Supervening Impossibility:
1. Section 56(para 2) provides that when the performance of a contract becomes subsequently impossibe or illegal, the contract becomes void.
2. Section 65 provides that when a contract becomes void, any person who has received any advantage under it must restore it, or make compensation for it, to the person from whom he received it.
3. Section 56 (para 3) provides that, 'where one person has promised to do something which he knew, or with reasonable diligence, might have known, and which the promisee did not know to be impossible or unlawful, such promisor for any loss which such promisee sustains through the non-performance of the promise. For example- p contracts to B being already married to C, and being forbidden by the law to which he is subject to practice polygamy. P must make compensation to B for any loss caused to her by non-performance of his promise.
Add a comment