Self-induced frustration CASES
In English law, self-induced frustration occurs when a party’s own actions or negligence contribute to circumstances that might otherwise have frustrated a contract, preventing them from claiming frustration as a defence.
Definition and Principles
Frustration releases parties from contractual obligations due to unforeseen events making performance impossible or radically different. However, if the frustrating event is caused or significantly contributed to by one party’s actions or omissions, frustration cannot be invoked.
Legal Consequences
- Parties causing or contributing to the frustration remain bound by the contract.
- The innocent party may seek remedies such as damages for breach.
Practical Importance
Recognising self-induced frustration helps parties understand their responsibilities, emphasising the importance of due care to avoid inadvertently causing events that hinder performance.
Home » Self-induced frustration
A contract for transporting an oil rig contained a force majeure clause. The transporter, whose designated vessel sank, cancelled the contract despite having an alternative vessel available which was allocated to other work. The court held the cancellation was a breach of contract. Facts The plaintiffs (Lauritzen) contracted with the defendants (Wijsmuller) for the transportation of an oil rig named the ‘Dan King’ during a specified period in 1984. The defendants owned two specialised, self-propelled barges capable of this transport: ‘Super Servant One’ and ‘Super Servant Two’. The contract provided that the defendants could use either vessel. Clause 17 of
A company chartered a trawler but was only granted three fishing licences for its fleet of five boats. It allocated the licences to its own boats, leaving the chartered one unlicensed, and then claimed the charter contract was frustrated. The court held frustration cannot be self-induced. Facts The respondents, Ocean Trawlers Ltd, chartered a steam trawler named the ‘St. Cuthbert’ to the appellants, Maritime National Fish Ltd. The charter was for a period of twelve months. The St. Cuthbert was fitted with an otter trawl, the use of which required a licence from the Canadian Minister of Fisheries, as stipulated
A time charterparty required a voyage via the Suez Canal, which then closed during the 1956 crisis. The charterers argued the contract was frustrated. The Court of Appeal held it was not; the longer, more expensive voyage around the Cape was not radically different. Facts The owners of the vessel, The Eugenia, (Ocean Tramp Tankers Corporation) chartered it to the charterers (V/O Sovfracht) for a time charter trip from Genoa to India via the Black Sea. The charterparty contained a war clause which stipulated that the vessel should not be brought into any zone which was dangerous as a result
