Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{:Contracts/TOC}}{{Breadcrumb|parent_page=Contracts|alias={{SUBPAGENAME}}}} | | {{otheruses4|the excuse for non-performance of a [[contract]]|the criminal defense|Impossibility defense}} |
| In [[contract law]], '''impossibility''' is an excuse for the nonperformance of duties under a [[contract]], based on a change in circumstances (or the discovery of preexisting circumstances), the nonoccurrence of which was an underlying assumption of the contract, that makes performance of the contract literally impossible.
| | {{redirect|Impossible}} |
| | {{dablink|See [[modal logic]] for logic which discusses impossibility, [[contingency]] and [[necessity]]}} |
| | {{unreferenced|date=September 2007}} |
|
| |
|
| For example, if Rachel contracts to pay Joey $1000 to paint her house on October 1, but the house burns to the ground before the end of September, Rachel is excused from her duty to pay Joey the $1000, and he is excused from his duty to paint her house; however, Joey may still be able to sue under the theory of [[unjust enrichment]] for the value of any benefit he conferred on Rachel before her house burned down.
| | {{Contract law}}'''THERE IZ NO SUCH THING AS IMPOSSIBLE JUST HIGHLY UNLIKLEY!!!!!!''' |
|
| |
|
| The parties to a contract may choose to ignore impossibility by inserting a [[hell or high water clause]], which mandates that payments continue even if completion of the contract becomes physically impossible.
| |
|
| |
|
| In common law, for the defense of "impossibility" to be raised performance must not merely be difficult or unexpectedly costly for one party, there must be no way for it to actually be accomplished; however, it is beginning to be recognized that "impossibility" under this doctrine can also exist when the contemplated performance can be done but only at an excessive and unreasonable cost, i.e., commercial impracticability.<ref>See, e.g., {{cite court |litigants=Transatlantic Financing Corp. v. United States |vol=363 |reporter=F.2d |opinion=312 |pinpoint= |court=[[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit|D.C. Cir.]] |date=1966 |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/363/312/264117/ |accessdate=2018-07-23 |quote=}}</ref> On the other hand, some sources see "impossibility" and [[impracticability]] as being related but separate defenses.
| | STOP CHANGING THE PAGE |
|
| |
|
| The [[English law|English]] case that established the doctrine of impossibility at [[common law]] is ''[[Taylor v. Caldwell]].''<ref>3 B.&S. 826, 122 Eng.Rep. 309 (K.B. 1863).</ref> | | The [[England|English]] case that established this doctrine at [[common law]] is ''[[Taylor v. Caldwell]].'' |
| | |
| | ==Related to science== |
| | * Impossibility by [[John D. Barrow]] ©1998 ISBN 0-09-977211-6 - Investigates the limits of science and the science of limits. |
|
| |
|
| ==See also== | | ==See also== |
Line 17: |
Line 21: |
| * [[Hell or high water clause]] | | * [[Hell or high water clause]] |
| * [[Mutual assent]] | | * [[Mutual assent]] |
| * ''[[Ultra posse nemo obligatur]]''
| |
|
| |
|
| ==References==
| | [[Category:Common law]] |
| | [[Category:Contract law]] |
| | [[Category:Equitable defenses]] |
| | |
| | |
| | {{law-term-stub}} |
|
| |
|
| <references />
| | [[fi:Mahdottomuus]] |