16 Oct

When Will A Court Generally Discharge A Party From An Agreement


Less completely impractical than impossibility, but still the reasons for the discharge, are the impracticability of the common law and its relative and commercial impracticability. Which of the following statements is false with regard to discharge by agreement? Impracticality refers to performance, not to the party that pronounces it. Only if the meaning or function is impracticable is the debtor relieved. The difference is between “the thing can`t be done” and “I can`t do it”. The first refers to what is objectively impracticable, and the second to what is subjectively impracticable. The fact that an obligation is subjectively impracticable does not excuse it if the circumstances that made the obligation more difficult are not exceptional. A buyer is responsible for the purchase price of a home, and his inability to raise the money does not excuse him or allow him to avoid a claim for damages if the seller pronounces the action. Christy v. Pilkinton, 273 P.W.2d 533 (Ark 1954). When Andy promises to take Anne to the football stadium for ten dollars, he can`t get out of his deal because someone hit his car half an hour before pick-up (making it unusable).

He could rent a car or take her in a taxi, although it costs much more than the amount she was willing to pay him. But if the deal was that he would carry it in his car, then circumstances make his performance objectively impractical – the equivalent of impossible – and he is excused. “You must be satisfied or reimbursed” is a common advertisement. A Contracting Party may require that it not have to pay or otherwise perform its obligation, unless the debtor`s performance performs it or a third party is satisfied with the performance. Discharge by alternative agreement is a third possibility of mutual withdrawal. The parties may conclude a novationThe replacement of one obligation by another by mutual agreement of both parties; as a general rule, the replacement of one of the original Contracting Parties by the consent of the remaining Party. either a new contract or a contract in which a new person is replaced for the original debtor and he is dismissed. If Mr. Olson is required to deliver a car to Jack, Jack and Mr. Olson may agree that the Dewey dealer will deliver the car to Jack instead of Mr. Olson; The latter is relieved by this novation. A replacement agreementA new agreement between the original parties who have waived the rights under the old agreement.

can also simply replace the original between the original parts. If the parties have made a basic assumption, express or implied, that certain circumstances would not occur, but that they do occur, then a party will be released from the performance of its obligations if its primary purpose has been “materially thwarted” in the preparation of the contract. This is not a rule of objective impossibility. .

Teck Lee Tan

Field Engineer and Tech Artist at Unity Technologies


You can also find me at:

Post Categories

  • No categories