Supervening illegality refers to a situation where a new law, regulation, or court ruling makes the subject of a contract or offer illegal. When this occurs, the original offer is automatically terminated. This concept ensures that parties are not held accountable for fulfilling obligations that have become unlawful due to changes in the legal landscape.
Supervening illegality is primarily used in contract law. It is relevant in various legal contexts, including civil, commercial, and sometimes criminal law. When a legal change impacts the performance of a contract, it can relieve parties from their obligations without penalty. Users can manage related legal documents through resources like US Legal Forms, which provide templates crafted by experienced attorneys.
Here are a couple of examples of abatement:
One notable case illustrating supervening illegality is Avery v. Bowden (1856). In this case, a ship was contracted to transport cargo from Odessa. However, the outbreak of the Crimean War led to a government regulation that prohibited loading cargo at enemy ports. As a result, the ship was excused from its contractual obligations due to supervening illegality.
| Term | Definition | Key Difference |
|---|---|---|
| Frustration of Purpose | A contract becomes impossible to fulfill due to unforeseen circumstances. | Frustration relates to unforeseen events, while supervening illegality is specifically about changes in law. |
| Impossibility of Performance | Contract obligations cannot be performed due to physical impossibility. | Impossibility focuses on physical barriers, whereas supervening illegality involves legal barriers. |
If you find yourself in a situation where supervening illegality may apply, consider the following steps:
Browse our library of 85,000+ state-specific legal templates.
Your contract is automatically terminated, and you are not liable for non-performance.