CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF THE DOCTRINE OF FRUSTRATION AND ITS APPLICABILITY IN NIGERIA

The doctrine of frustration in Nigerian contract law provides relief from performance when unforeseen supervening events render a contract impossible, illegal, or radically different from what the parties contemplated, without fault of either party. This study critically appraises the doctrine's theoretical foundations, its applicability across various contract types under Nigerian common law principles (as received from English law), and key judicial interpretations by the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal (e.g., in cases like Nwaolisah v. Nwabufoh and Mazin Engineering v. Tower Aluminium). It highlights ambiguities in determining frustrating events—particularly economic hardship, pandemics, or government actions—and procedural/evidentiary challenges in invoking it as a defense. The analysis reveals gaps in clarity, foreseeability tests, and remedies post-frustration. Recommendations include legislative codification for greater certainty, clearer drafting guidelines for force majeure clauses as alternatives, and judicial reforms to balance pacta sunt servanda with equity in modern commercial contexts.