Sums paid and payable before frustration, and expenses (LR(FC)A 1943 s.1(2))
Ngozi Eze hired Fairfield Hall in England for her wedding reception on 20 July 2026 for a total fee of £10,000. Under the contract she paid a £4,000 deposit in January. A further £3,000 was due on 1 June, but she had not paid it. On 10 June the hall was destroyed by fire without fault on either side, and it is agreed that the contract was frustrated. Before the fire the hall's owner had spent £1,500 in preparing for the event. The contract makes no provision for what happens if the hall cannot be used.
Which of the following best describes the position under the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943?
Choose one answer to see the reasoning.
Worked answer
Correct answer D: The £3,000 ceases to be payable and Ngozi can recover the £4,000, but the court may, if just, let the owner keep up to £1,500 for expenses.
THE RULE TO REMEMBER
On frustration, money paid is recoverable and money payable ceases to be payable, but the court may let the payee keep or recover up to its pre-discharge expenses if just (LR(FC)A 1943 s.1(2)).
Sums paid and payable before frustration, and expenses (LR(FC)A 1943 s.1(2))
Section 1(2) of the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 provides that all sums paid before the time of discharge are recoverable, and sums payable before that time cease to be payable. Under the proviso, if the payee incurred expenses before discharge in or for the purpose of performance, the court may, if it considers it just having regard to all the circumstances, allow the payee to retain or recover the whole or any part of the sums paid or payable, not exceeding the expenses incurred. Applying this, the £3,000 due on 1 June ceases to be payable and the £4,000 deposit is prima facie recoverable. The owner incurred £1,500 of expenses, so the court may allow it to keep up to £1,500 of the sums paid or payable if just. Ngozi will therefore recover between £2,500 and £4,000, depending on the court's view.
Why A is wrong: The Act replaced the old common law position for contracts within it; sums paid are recoverable and sums payable cease to be payable.
Why B is wrong: Sums payable before the time of discharge cease to be payable under s.1(2), even if they had already fallen due.
Why C is wrong: The proviso to s.1(2) lets the court allow the payee to keep or recover sums up to the amount of its expenses, if just.
Why E is wrong: The expenses allowance is capped at the expenses incurred, £1,500 in total; the owner cannot keep that and recover the £3,000 as well.
A little more practice done.
Related questions
Recovering money paid for an unlawful purpose (Patel v Mirza)
Which of the following best describes whether Ollie can recover the £25,000?
Damages for negligent misrepresentation and the reverse burden of proof (Misrepresentation Act 1967 s.2(1))
Which of the following best describes Tom's position if he claims damages under the Misrepresentation Act 1967?
Excluding liability for negligence in a business contract (Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 s.2)
Which of the following best describes the effect of clause 9 under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977?
A GOOD HABIT, DELIVERED
Tomorrow's question.
In your inbox.
One free question a day, with the answer and reasoning.
No course pitches. Just your daily practice.