Krell v Henry (Frustration of contracts)

One of the famous series of "Coronation Cases" which followed the sudden cancellation of the coronation of King Edward VII in 1902. This case confirmed some of the key rules for the frustration of contracts - one of the ways in which a contract can come to an end without a breach, but also without performance.
This case was requested by Jill Nunley. Hope it helps, Jill!
If my videos are helpful to you, you could always buy me a coffee!
www.buymeacoff...

[@jillnunley7237]

Thank You so very much Sir!

[@AnthsLawSchool]

My pleasure! But please call me Anthony, my military days are long behind me ;-)

[@rishab593]

Dawn and Dave enter into a contract for Dave to market one of Dawn’s development sites and act as auctioneer at an auction on 7th November 2019. On 7th November 2019 Dave needs to travel to the auction town which is three hundred miles away. He had booked a train ticket but when he arrives at the train station he discovers that all the trains have been cancelled due to emergency engineering works. He looks into flights but they cost twenty times the cost of his train ticket. As he has not got his car or driving licence with him he phones Dawn and tells her he will not be able to make it to the auction which will need to be postponed. Dawn is furious that she has lost the opportunity to sell the property on 7th November.

[@AnthsLawSchool]

I'm not sure that I agree with DF. If the contract was to "act as an auctioneer at an auction on 7th November 2019" then Dave would be in breach, unless there was some other provision to save him. He ought to have been more careful about his travel arrangements. The question is whether the breach will be actionable - if the auction is, say, delayed by a week, would there really be any injury to form the basis for an award of damages? Either way, this wouldn't be frustration. It only makes the contract less convenient, not impossible :)

[@mohamedabdulmajeed9769]

Very sincere presentation

[@AnthsLawSchool]

Thank you very much indeed.

[@deeptigarg3536]

Explained very well..regards

[@AnthsLawSchool]

Thanks so much!

[@kasunigamage7713]

Well understood ❤️

[@bingshenzhou163]

I am sorry Anthoney. Wasn't the booking two days, instead of "2 nights"? Here is a coorespondence from the defendant I took from the judgment- "I am in receipt of yours of the 18th instant, inclosing form of agreement for the suite of chambers on the third floor at 56A, Pall Mall, which I have agreed to take for the two days, the 26th and 27th instant, for the sum of 751...

[@AnthsLawSchool]

Well yes, that's true. I used the term "nights" just because that is the customary measure for contemporary room bookings. I'm not sure much turns on "days" against "nights" though. The coronation was still cancelled, and the contract frustrated :)

[@bingshenzhou163]

@@AnthsLawSchool Thank you sir

[@jazminshultz2825]

Succinct and brilliant. Thank you :)

[@AnthsLawSchool]

Thanks so much for your kind words Jazmin :)

[@deependrasinghrathore1601]

Just 2 minutes But impressive

[@AnthsLawSchool]

Thanks mate! You are from India? There was actually a very impressive Indian Arny contingent in that coronation parade in 1902!

[@deependrasinghrathore1601]

@@AnthsLawSchool yes sir I am from India

[@deependrasinghrathore1601]

I am a law student and Your videos are very much useful

[@AnthsLawSchool]

Well best of luck with your studies! :)

[@deependrasinghrathore1601]

@@AnthsLawSchool thank you sir

[@shorouqtahraoui]

Maritime National Fish v Ocean Trawlers

[@AnthsLawSchool]

That's a great frustration case, I will put it on the list for a Casenote!