Abstract
Appearing of forcible events or other reasons which hinder the performance of contract or cause its frustration has special legal effects and destroy the casual link between the obligator and the loss resulting from its non-performance. In this situation, these reasons affect the structure of contract and possibly may cause the discharge or suspension of contract. Therefore, the effect of occurring this kind of excuse are twofold. One of the important consequences of occurring this event is the exemption of the obligator from contractual responsibility, because, the non-performance is not attributed to him. The other effect is that force majeure changes the structure of the contract. A contract that encounters to force majeure may be discharged forcibly or willingly or its performance suspended. Our purpose in this article is to review these effects.
Highlights
After making a contract, its parties must perform the agreement efficiently
If the performing of agreement is impossible by the party of contract, he will have the right of performing it by another person but with his own cost. This type of contract execution is possible provided that the superintending of the party is not the condition of doing it
During the contract, some person commits that for haltering the walls of the river creates some fortifications for the walls in the to prevent from the flood risk, but before or during performing the contract, the river dries or changes its path. In this case, performing the contract is legally and financially possible, but it does not supply the purpose of the parties. This type of impossibility of performing the contract has been paid attention in the famous case of the coronation of Edward VII in England in 1902 that during that case in the courts of England, the “frustration of purpose” doctrine was firstly posed in the law of England (Treitel, 1989, p. 298)
Summary
Its parties must perform the agreement efficiently. Whenever one of the parties for any reason refuses to perform it, according to the articles 237 onwards of the civil law, the other party will have the binding right of performing the agreement. During the contract, some person commits that for haltering the walls of the river creates some fortifications for the walls in the to prevent from the flood risk, but before or during performing the contract, the river dries or changes its path In this case, performing the contract is legally and financially possible, but it does not supply the purpose of the parties. This type of impossibility of performing the contract has been paid attention in the famous case of the coronation of Edward VII in England in 1902 that during that case in the courts of England, the “frustration of purpose” doctrine was firstly posed in the law of England The non-performance of contract due to the frustration of purpose has effects that have been addressed in this article
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
