正在編輯用戶:Hinnia/Frustration （章節）

== LAW REFORM (FRUSTRATED CONTRACTS) ACT 1943 ==

* Purpose: To provide more flexible, restitution-based solutions to adjust losses and prevent unjust enrichment after frustration.
* Scope: The Act applies to most frustrated contracts governed by English law, BUT NOT to:
** Certain charterparties and contracts for the carriage of goods by sea (s.2(5)(a)).
** Contracts of insurance, except as provided (s.2(5)(b)).
** Contracts for the sale of specific goods which perish before risk passes (s.2(5)(c)) – these are governed by Sale of Goods Act 1979, s.7.

=== Section 1(2): Adjustment of Money Payments ===

* Rule: All sums paid before discharge are recoverable, and all sums payable cease to be payable.
* Proviso (The "Expenses" Exception):
** Court may allow a party who incurred expenses in performing the contract to retain or recover all or part of the sums paid/payable
*** Up to the amount of expenses incurred.
* Test for Applying the Proviso (from Gamerco): The party claiming expenses must show:
** They incurred expenses (paid or payable).
** They did so before the time of discharge.
** The expenses were incurred in, or for the purpose of, performing the contract.
** It is just in all the circumstances to allow retention/recovery.
* Case: Gamerco S.A. v I.C.M./Fair Warning (Agency) Ltd [1995] 1 WLR 1226
** Facts: Concert contract frustrated. Promoter (P) had paid $412,500 to artist's agent (D). Both sides had incurred expenses.
** Holding: P entitled to full recovery of the prepayment. D failed to satisfy the test of justice
*** Expenses were not a sufficient reason to allow retention in the circumstances.

=== Section 1(3): Adjustment for Non-Money "Valuable Benefit" ===

* Rule: Where a party ("the plaintiff") has conferred a valuable non-money benefit on another ("the defendant") before discharge
** Court may award a "just sum" to the plaintiff, recoverable from the defendant.
* Limit: The "just sum" cannot exceed the value of the benefit obtained by the defendant.
* Two-Stage Process (from BP v Hunt):
** Identify and Value the Benefit: Determine what benefit the defendant obtained and its objective value.
** Assess the "Just Sum": Award a fair sum, considering all circumstances, especially:
*** (a) The expenses incurred by the defendant.
*** (b) The effect of the frustrating event on the benefit.
* Case: BP (Exploration) Libya v Hunt [1979] 1 WLR 783
** Facts: Contract for oil exploration frustrated. BP had provided services and equipment, conferring a benefit on Hunt.
** Holding (Robert Goff J): The court must first identify and value the end product or benefit received (e.g., an oil concession).
** "just sum" is then assessed, which is typically the reasonable value of the plaintiff's performance (a quantum meruit)
** Capped at the benefit's value and adjusted for fairness.