Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Frustration of purpose, in law, is a defense to enforcement of a contract.Frustration of purpose occurs when an unforeseen event undermines a party's principal purpose for entering into a contract such that the performance of the contract is radically different from performance of the contract that was originally contemplated by both parties, and both parties knew of the principal purpose at ...
Equitable defenses are usually affirmative defenses asking the court to excuse an act because the party bringing the cause of action has acted in some inequitable way. Traditionally equitable defenses were only available at the Court of Equity and not available at common law.
An affirmative defense to a civil lawsuit or criminal charge is a fact or set of facts other than those alleged by the plaintiff or prosecutor which, if proven by the defendant, defeats or mitigates the legal consequences of the defendant's otherwise unlawful conduct.
The doctrine of impracticability in the common law of contracts excuses performance of a duty, where the said duty has become unfeasibly difficult or expensive for the party who was to perform.
Frustration Krell v Henry [ 1 ] [1903] 2 KB 740 is an English case which sets forth the doctrine of frustration of purpose in contract law . It is one of a group of cases, known as the " coronation cases ", which arose from events surrounding the coronation of Edward VII and Alexandra in 1902.
The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate.
Frustration Herne Bay Steamboat Co v Hutton [1903] 2 KB 683 is a case on the subject of frustration of purpose . It is one of a group of cases arising out of the same event, known as the coronation cases .
If the lender agrees to reduce the closing costs by an extra $1000 and the borrowers agree, then there has been an accord and satisfaction. If the borrowers later sue for breach of contract, the settlement (offer and acceptance of the $1000) constitutes an accord and satisfaction and is a valid defense to the borrower's lawsuit.