Davis v Fareham UDC [1956] AC 696

Written By Nicolas Heyes

House of Lords

Basic Facts: C (Davis), building contractors, agreed to complete houses for D (Fareham UDC) in eight months for a fixed fee. Due to shortages, the work extended to 22 months, and C incurred additional costs. C claimed that the contract was frustrated due to unforeseen shortages and sought payment on a quantum meruit basis.

Issue for the Court: What events constitute frustration in a contract?

Held : The court held that a contract is not frustrated merely due to delays; it must result in a radically different obligation.

  • Lord Reid argued that frustration is based on whether the contract, as written, applies to the new situation. Delays due to shortages did not fundamentally alter the contract.

  • Lord Radcliffe found that the delays did not fundamentally alter the contractual obligations, and thus, frustration could not be invoked.

💡Leveluplaw : This case clarified the conditions under which a contract can be deemed frustrated, focusing on whether the event radically changes the contract’s obligations.

Nicolas Heyes
Previous

Dimskal Shipping Co SA v International Transport Workers Federation [1992] 2 AC 152
Next

Darlington BC v Wiltshier Northern Ltd [1995] 1 WLR 68