A comparison of theory of frustration and theory of force majeure: changes in circumstances and Hardship performance contract

Two theories of frustration and force majeure almost refer to the same subject, namely, the impossibility of performance of the commitment or contract. However, although they are very similar in theory and practice, they have differences that distinguish one from the other. For instances, frustration of contract has a wider scope, compared to force majeure. However, in comparing the theories regarding changed circumstances and hardship of performance of contract and theory of frustration, it should be considered that in the former, the performance of contract is not cancelled but faced by high hardship and cost, while in the latter, the performance of commitment or contract either becomes partly or completely cancelled as applicable or, if it remains possible to perform, it becomes essentially different from what is originally agreed and intended by the parties. Thus, according aforementioned theories, they are similar, they may not be considered as identical. Briefly speaking, theories of changed circumstances and hardship of performance of contract have a wider scope than that of frustration of contract.