F - Frustration
29/5/20
DAYAH v THE PARTNERS OF BUSHLOE STREET SURGERY [2020] EWHC 1375 (QB)
Considers principles of frustration of contracts [50], [67]. On the facts the lower court had been right to hold that a contract had not been frustrated where the contract made provision for the relevant eventuality [80].
13/5/13
MELLI BANK PLC v HOLBUD LTD, (Comm)
The fact that an Iranian bank had its assets frozen on being designated under Council Decision 2008/475/EC, did not prevent a facility agreement from being performed, nor had the agreement been frustrated. The defendant could have sought a licence to continue to make payments to the bank, but had failed to do so. The defendant had not accepted any repudiation of the agreement and was therefore liable for the commitment fee payable to the bank.