The outbreak of the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19-Outbreak”) has a potential impact in the performance of a contract. If a contract does not contain a force majeure clause, a contracting party may look to the common law doctrine of frustration to relieve it from its obligations. Unlike force majeure clauses which focuses on the parties' express intention on how to deal with supervening events, frustration is implied by law and thus would only be considered in the absence of an express force majeure clause. In Malaysia, the doctrine of frustration is codified in section 57(2) of the Contracts Act 1957. A doctrinal analogy of the doctrine of frustration and section 57 of the Contracts Act 1950 indicates a pandemic such as the covid-19 would not frustrate a contract. Force majeure clause should be used as a protective tool to prevent losses to the contracting parties or alternatively the Principles of European Contract Law and the Unidroit Principles that make provisions for hardship as well as force majeure should be implemented.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Teaching law is normally depicted with students seated in a largelecture theatre with the professor in law who lectures in the traditionallecture method feeding students with the content of law. This content isfaithfully taken down by students as notes while trying to make sense ofthe professor’s lectures. This was the norm of teaching law some 20 yearsback during the author’s student time and still is the practice because thelecture method is the most efficient means to cover the vast subject contentof law. Furthermore, it is opined that it is easier to expound one’s viewsthan to ask penetrating questions which rarely provoke the activity oforiginal thinking. As such, law students are inundated with substantive andprocedural law. Little thought is given to the learning process. The corpusof learning the law becomes less significant. Emphasis is on teaching thelaw. The traditional teaching norm of lecture method is so innate that thetraditional method of teaching law is perpetuated, dragging the studentsinto a dry and boring journey of studying law. Even though the study oflaw is daunted as a serious one, but equal significance should be givento provoke the cognitive thinking of the students. Law students should betaught to think like a lawyer. Additionally, some form of creativity can bean added value in teaching law which makes learning law more vibrant.This article laments that the traditional pedagogy of teaching law merelyimparts knowledge, whereas law students should be taught to learn the law,stimulate critical thinking and ignite their cognitive skills.
Keywords: law, diversity, teaching pedagogy
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.