1801967
| Question | Answer |
| What is the claim of condictio causa data causa non secuta for? | To recover what was conferred for a future lawful purpose out with the contract that failed or under a contract that was frustrated |
| What are the essentials for such a claim? | i) Must have been a DELIBERATE CONFERRAL of a benefit by P to D ii) for a future lawful purpose out with the contract that failed iii) no defence was available to D; the content of which was either that P knew from the very beginning that the purpose was not capable of fulfilment or that P prevented the fulfilment of the purpose in bad faith ...OR... i) a benefit was conferred by one or both parties to a contract that was FRUSTRATED |
| Which case defined the claim of Condictio C.D. and at what levels? | Shilliday v Smith, as per Lord President Rodger: Where A is enriched because B has paid him money or transferred property to him in the expectation of receiving a consideration from A, but A does not provide that consideration... also... where B paid the money or transferred the property to A on a particular basis which fails to materialise - for example, in contemplation of a marriage which does not take place = 2 different levels relate to use of this claim within and out with contract in Scots law. |
| When something is given for a 'basis' that fails is this enforceable in contract? | No, this is where UE steps in - use of claim out with contract The Condictio C.D. is used where something is given for a CONSIDERATION that fails in cases of frustration of contract - use of claim within contract |
| 'Cause'? | Stair applies Condictio C.D. to cases where ownership of a thing has been without any agreement for its return but the 'CAUSE' on which the thing was received has FAILED. E.g. where a thing has been handed over in contemplation of marriage the 'cause' is the marriage |
| What is the basis of performance by both parties? | The purpose which the person who makes the conferral seeks to achieve by the performance is known and accepted as the basis of performance by both parties. |
| How is 'purpose' identified? | May be expressly agreed e.g. I give X in view of your forthcoming marriage, or it may be inferable from the terms of the arrangement between the parties - Bankton. |
| Lord Morison in Grieve v Morrison | 'Cause'/'Purpose' - 'mutually agreed understanding, either express or to be implied from the circumstances' |
| Are claims for recovery of a benefit for a MOTIVE (rather than a cause) that fails recoverable? | No they are irrecoverable |
| What range of examples of cases does the Condictio C.D cover? | 1) Performance made on the understanding that the person who receives it does something 2) Performance made on the understanding that what is received will be put to a particular use 3) Performance made in anticipation of creating an obligation 4) Purpose out with but closely associated with contract |
| Performance made on the understanding that the person who receives it does something | Typically agreement will provide for reciprocation which cannot be, or is not intended by the parties to be, the subject matter of an obligation. Stair - application of Condictio C.D - things given in contemplation of marriage (the CAUSE) are recoverable if the marriage does not take place Shilliday v Smith: woman repaired house that belonged to man to whom she was going to marriage in anticipation of their marriage, didn't take place, was able to recover the extent to which the man was enriched at her expense. |
| Shilliday v Smith | Performance made on the understanding that the person who receives it does something.... - Things given in contemplation of marriage (the CAUSE) are recoverable if the marriage does not take place - woman repaired house that belonged to man to whom she was going to marriage in anticipation of their marriage, didn't take place - was able to recover the extent to which the man was enriched at her expense. |
| Satchwell v McIntosh | Performance made on understanding that the receiver does something. Cause need not be anticipation of marriage. - man and woman sold properties to buy one in Edinburgh, woman put property wholly in her name despite man's contributions, he developed MS, she left him and told him to leave house. - held: future purpose was co-habitation and it was on the failure to co-habit that the purpose failed, man able to recover in claim of Condicitio Causa Data Causa Non Secuta |
| Performance made on the understanding that what is received will be put to a particular use | E.g. Money given as a scholarship |
| Performance made in anticipation of creating an obligation | Bankton - A bond given in hopes of getting the money which is not delivered may be recovered |
| Purpose outwith but closely associated with contract | Parties enter into contract for an agreed purpose - can this is also be a 'cause' of the performance which renders what is transferred under the valid contract recoverable if it fails? E.g. P sells D land adjoining their properties for D to build a swimming pool which will be used by both their families. If D fails to build swimming pool can P recover the land? |
| What defences are there to a condictio C.D claim? | 1) 'Knowledge' that the future lawful purpose out with the contract was not capable of fulfilment 2) 'Behaviour contrary to good faith' by P - prevented fulfilment of purpose in bad faith |
| What is the effect of frustration of a contract? | Contract still exists but suspends future performance |
| Development of Condictio C.D for frustration cases? | Cantiere San Rocco v Clyde Shipbuilding and Engineering Co - Used the claim, has result that the relationship of parties to a valid, albeit frustrated, contract is regulated by the law of unjustified enrichment |
| What are the consequences of the approach of using a Condictio C.D. claim for valid but frustrated contracts as in Cantiere San Rocco v Clyde Shipbuilding and Engineering Co? | - May be questioned whether it is acceptable that no mechanism provided for apportionment between the parties of losses arising from frustration, where one party has made outlays in carrying out the contract which have not actually enriched the other party. |
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.