ABSTRACT
The essence of the doctrine of frustration is release from the chains of a contract where supervening events render performance of that contract radically or substantially different from that which was contemplated by the parties when entering into the contract. Thus it is relevant to consider what were the common assumptions of the parties at the time of contracting, including what was actually foreseen by the parties since an event that is actually foreseen cannot ordinarily found a claim for frustration. The doctrine of frustration will only come into play if the event occurs after the commencement of the contract – thus a builder who fails to overcome antecedent obstacles cannot avoid responsibility. If a contract is discharged through frustration both parties are released from any obligation to perform any outstanding primary obligations under the contract. The doctrine of frustration is closely linked to the concept of mutual mistake.
