ABSTRACT
Frustration occurs whenever the law recognises that without default of either party a contractual obligation has become incapable of being performed because the circumstances in which performance is called for would render it a thing radically different from that which was undertaken by the contract. The frustrating event renders the contract illegal, the parties cannot exclude the doctrine of frustration, as this would be contrary to public policy. Perhaps the most obvious example of frustration is where a change in the law occurs between making of the contract and its execution which renders performance of the contract illegal. The consequences of frustration depend on whether the position is governed by statute or by common law. It should also be noted that the common law position in England is different from the position in Australia. In Samoa, the injustice which may arise in the event of frustration at common law has been remedied by the Frustrated Contracts Act 1975.
