According to the doctrine of frustration of purpose:
A) complete performance is not achieved because of minor deviations from the agreed-upon performance.
B) the promisor is estopped from denying the existence of a contract where the promisee has detrimentally relied on that promise.
C) where both parties know the purpose of a contract and, through no fault of either party, the reason for the contract no longer exists, the contract is terminated.
D) in a contract for the sale of goods, one or more terms may be missing but the court can find a contract, nonetheless, where the parties have intended to make a contract.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The doctrine of frustration of purpose applies when the purpose of a contract no longer exists due to unforeseeable circumstances beyond the control of both parties. In such a situation, the contract is terminated even if both parties have fully performed their obligations. The key requirement is that both parties must have had a shared understanding of the purpose of the contract at the time of formation. Option A is incorrect because minor deviations from the agreed-upon performance do not necessarily frustrate the purpose of the contract. Option B is incorrect because it refers to promissory estoppel, which is a separate doctrine. Option D is incorrect because it refers to the formation of a contract, not its termination due to frustration of purpose.

According to the Doctrine of Frustration of Purpose