Contracts/Impossibility
Page Module:Message box/ambox.css has no content.
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (September 2014) |
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.
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.
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.[1] On the other hand, some sources see "impossibility" and impracticability as being related but separate defenses.
The English case that established the doctrine of impossibility at common law is Taylor v. Caldwell.[2]
See also
- Impossibility defense
- Contract law
- Force majeure
- Hardship clause
- Hell or high water clause
- Mutual assent
- Ultra posse nemo obligatur
References
- ↑ See, e.g., Transatlantic Financing Corp. v. United States, 363 F.2d 312 (D.C. Cir. 1966).
- ↑ 3 B.&S. 826, 122 Eng.Rep. 309 (K.B. 1863).
