 |
Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Contracts/Impossibility: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
en>Hetar (Revert for vandalism to revision dated 02:15, 5 April 2006 by Hetar, oldid 47024416 using popups) |
en>Eastlaw (added link to Taylor v. Caldwell) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
For example, if Rachel contracts to pay Joey $500 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 $500, and he is excused from the duty to paint her house. | For example, if Rachel contracts to pay Joey $500 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 $500, and he is excused from the duty to paint her house. | ||
The [[England|English]] case which established this doctrine at [[common law]] is ''[[Taylor v. Caldwell]]''. | |||
[[Category:Common law]] | [[Category:Common law]] | ||
Revision as of 22:38, April 8, 2006
Template:ContractLaw Impossibility is an excuse for non-performance of duties under a contract, based on a change in circumstances (or the discovery of preexisting circumstances) that makes performance of the contract literally impossible. For such a defense 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.
For example, if Rachel contracts to pay Joey $500 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 $500, and he is excused from the duty to paint her house.
The English case which established this doctrine at common law is Taylor v. Caldwell.
