Condition subsequent / Contract frustration

[pearlazula]

Hi,

If I have a clause in the contract that stipulates "no adverse change in the law" (e.g. a new tax is imposed on one of the parties by the government, or a new law is created that prevents one of the parties from keeping one of its promises - contract would be finished in 10 months, but because of the new law the party will only be able to finish it later) otherwise the contract can be terminated, would this be considered a "condition subsequent or an implied term"? If so, is the whole contract terminated or only the affected part?

If I don't have such a clause in the contract, and there is a change in law as per the above, would this be considered a "contractual frustration", or the court understand that this is not an "unforseen event" and should have been contemplated by the parties - that is, it is not a contractual frustration, so the contract cannot be terminated?

The main purpose of the contract is a joint venture agreement to develop land into new subdivisions. So, the changes in law would just mean extra cost and more time for the development to be completed. But can it be considered a government intervention - and so, be a contractual frustration?

In any case, can the money already invested by one of the parties be recovered? What happens with the work already started by the other party?

Thank you!

 

[las365]

If this is homework, you need to do it yourself. The purpose being that you learn how to find the answer in a scholarly manner as well as learning the answer.

If this is a real-life situation, you need a lawyer, as this is not in any way a DIY peoject.

 

[pearlazula]

To las365...

I have my reasons for posting a question in here, I'm free to do so and I owe no explanation whatsoever to anyone. Especially to arrogant people.

If you're not interested in helping, mind your own business and simply don't post a reply.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

I have my reasons for posting a question in here, I'm free to do so and I owe no explanation whatsoever to anyone. Especially to arrogant people.

If you're not interested in helping, mind your own business and simply don't post a reply.

Wow! Telling a long time member what they may and may not reply to. And you call las365 arrogant. Great way to get help.

In case you didn't figure it out, las365 is also free to post here, and owed no explanation whatsoever to anyone, especially to someone obviously looking for an easy answer to a homework assignment.

 

[pearlazula]

To Stevef...

I don't care how senior the member is, my friend.

I have myself helped many people in various subjects - both in person AND in different forums, without pre-concepts, never judging them and NEVER, NEVER trying to give them a moral lesson (as if anyone had the right to!).

If I came accross a question that I didn't like for any reason, I simply did not reply to them - and that's what the senior member and yourself should have done.

Quite clearly, you and your friend do not know the meaning of the word HELP.

There are plenty of well-known assignment help services out there that only require payment from you, nothing else, you ignorant. I would not be wasting my time researching and posting questions in forums if this was the case.

Luckily there are other forums, and there are people like me who are trully willing to AND have actually helped me, not narrow minded timewasters like you and your friend.

I won't be posting anything else in this specific forum, nor replying to nerds like you, because this is just ridiculous.