Islwyn Borough Council and Another v Newport Borough Council: CA 28 Jun 1993

Three local authorities disputed whether a contract had been made between them, and if so its terms, as to the financial support of a leisure centre.
Held: Later legislation need not frustrate agreement between the parties.
Hirts LJ said: ‘the agreement was in my judgment frustrated by supervening illegality . . the parties having covenanted to do something lawful, and section 42(a) having come in and hindered them from doing it, the covenant was repealed, leaving the Joint Committee powerless to fulfil their central function of management of the Leisure Centre.’
Glidewell, Hirst, Roch LJJ
Times 28-Jun-1993, 158 LG Rev 501, [1993] EWCA Civ 28
Local Government Act 1972 101(1), Education Act (No 2) 1986 42
England and Wales
CitedBaily v De Crespigny QBD 1869
A lessor had covenanted that neither he nor his assigns would build on a piece of land adjoining the demised premises. A railway company, under powers derived from a subsequent private Act, compulsorily acquired the land and erected a station on it. . .
CitedBrewster v Kitchell 1795
‘Where H covenants not do to an act or thing which was lawful to do, and an Act of Parliament comes after and compels him to do it, the statute repeals the covenant. So if H covenants to do a thing which is lawful, and an Act of Parliament comes in . .
CitedLlanelly Railway and Dock Company v London and North Western Railway Company CA 1872
James LJ said: ‘I start with this proposition that prima facia every contract is permanent and irrevocable and it lies upon a person who say that it is revocable or determinable to show either something special in the contract itself, or something . .
CitedIn Re Spenborough Urban District Council’s agreement; Spenborough Corporation v Cooke Sons and Company Ltd ChD 1968
A contract regulating the flow of industrial effluents into a public sewer contained no power of termination notwithstanding that the agreement it replaced did.
Held: There is no presumption in law that a joint venture is not terminable.
CitedStaffordshire Area Health Authority v South Staffordshire Waterworks Company CA 1978
There was no provision in the agreement, made in 1929, to supply water at all times hereafter, between the parties for a variation of the charges payable under the agreement, which had between 1929 and 1978 become derisory, being 1/20 of the current . .
CitedMetropolitan Water Board v Dick Kerr and Co Ltd HL 26-Nov-1917
In July 1914 the appellants contracted with the respondents, a firm of contractors, for the construction of a reservoir which was to take six years to build. The work was started, but in February 1916 the Minister of Munitions ordered it to cease . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.82435