The test is depriving substantially of the whole benefit, and does not depend on the condition warranty distinction. Now that this doctrine has matured, the old technicalities of pleading condition precedent are more than a century out of date. Such language obscures more than it reveals. The common law evolves not merely by breeding new principles, but also, when they are fully grown, by burying their progenitors. However, many undertakings are of a more complex character - a breach of which may or may not deprive of substantially the whole benefit.
Nothing can follow automatically from prior classification as condition or warranty.
In 1874, in Jackson, when frustration was developing, it was not surprising that analysis should be in terms of an express warranty to sail with all possible dispatch, giving rise to an implied condition precedent that the ship should arrive at a named port in time for the contemplated voyage. Now frustration has developed for a century, and pleading conditions precedent is more than a century out of date. The test is whether the party is deprived of substantially the whole benefit of the contract. The judge took all the right factors into account and arrived at the right answers, for the right reasons. This site is maintained by the Electronic Publishing Group at UniServe Law .