The pursuers maintained that, in consequence of the contract having become incapable of fulfilment, they were entitled to recover the money paid by them to the defenders in terms of the contract. The defenders contended that rights acquired under the contract cannot be disturbed by the termination of the contract owing to a cause for which neither is responsible, and that they were therefore entitled to retain the payment made to them.
Held: A buyer was entitled to repetition of the instalment of the price that was paid on signature of the contract as, owing to the war, further performance of the contract had become impossible. Lord Dunedin said that the remedy for frustration of the contract was given ‘not under the contract or because of breach of the contract inferring damages, but in respect of the equitable (of course I am not using the words in the technical English sense) doctrine of condictio causa data causa non secuta.’
Judges:
Lord Dunedin
Citations:
[1922] ScotCS CSIH – 3, 1922 SC 723, 1922 SLT 477
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – Lloyds TSB Foundation for Scotland v Lloyds Banking Group Plc SC 23-Jan-2013
A predecessor bank had created a trust into which it paid a small proportion of its profits. The parties now disputed the calculation of profits when the Bank declared a loss which allowed for an unrealised gain on the acquisition of HBOS. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Scotland, Contract, Equity
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279331