The doctrine of impossibility of performance rendering contracts void is based on
A. Implied term
B. Just & reasonable solution
C. Supervening impossibility
D. Unjust enrichment
Answer: Option C
Solution (By Examveda Team)
Doctrine of Impossibility of Performance:This doctrine states that a contract becomes void if, after its formation, the performance of the contract becomes impossible due to unforeseen circumstances. It's a crucial principle in contract law, ensuring fairness when events beyond the parties' control make fulfilling the agreement impossible.
Explanation of Correct Answer (C): Supervening Impossibility
The doctrine of impossibility of performance rests on the principle of supervening impossibility. This means that the impossibility arises after the contract is made, due to events that were not foreseeable at the time of the contract's creation. The initial possibility of performance is overtaken by a subsequent event making performance impossible. This 'supervening' event could be a natural disaster, a change in law, or the destruction of the subject matter of the contract. It's crucial to note that the impossibility must be objective, meaning it affects the contract's performance, not just the specific party's ability to perform.
Why other options are incorrect:
A: Implied Term: While a contract might have implied terms, the doctrine of impossibility doesn't primarily rely on these. The impossibility operates regardless of whether an express or implied term addresses the specific event causing the impossibility. It's a principle of law operating independently of expressed intentions within the contract.
B: Just & Reasonable Solution: While fairness is a consideration in contract law, the doctrine of impossibility focuses on objective impossibility, not merely on what's just or reasonable. A solution might be deemed just but still not qualify under the doctrine of impossibility unless the performance is objectively impossible.
D: Unjust Enrichment: Unjust enrichment is a separate legal principle concerning one party gaining unfairly at another's expense. Though related to fairness, it's distinct from the doctrine of impossibility which focuses on the objective impossibility of performance rather than the enrichment of a party.
Indian Contract Act:- Gods displayed in showcase of a shop with price tag is -
A. Invitation to offer
B. Counteroffer
C. Communication
D. None of these
A. Is available to Y's representatives alone
B. Is available to Z alone
C. Is available to Y's representatives & Z both
D. Is available to Y's representatives & after the death of Z, his representatives
Moses v. Macferlan (1555-1774) is a case relating to
A. Theory of unjust enrichment
B. The right of lien
C. Test of agency
D. Doctrine of frustration
A. The active concealment of a fact by one having knowledge or belief of the fact
B. A promise made without any intention of performing it
C. The suggestion, as a fact, of that which is true, by one who does believe it to be true
D. None above

Join The Discussion