The Dan King

English law has never set out with any clarity the limits to the doctrine of “self-induced” frustration. However, in J. Lauritzen A.S. v. Wijsmuller B.V. (The Dan King),1 Hobhouse, J., held that the doctrine has a wide sphere of application. Indeed, his interpretation, if correct, is so wide that a seller or supplier, who discovers that he is unable to fulfil the terms of his contracts with all of his customers because of a partial failure of supply due to a frustrating event, is likely to find that he is in breach of contract and liable to compensate those customers who have not received full contractual performance, unless he has taken the precaution of incorporating a suitably drafted force majeure clause into the contract.

The dispute arose out of a contract for the carriage of a drilling rig, the Dan King, from a shipyard in Japan to a location close to Rotterdam. The plaintiffs were the purchasers of the rig and the defendants were the carriers who agreed to transport