It is also pertinent to underscore that the defence of frustration of contract, like other recognized defenses, need not be specifically pleaded by using the word ‘frustration’ and it is sufficient that the party raising it pleads facts alleging impossibility of performance of a contract and alleges the occurrence of one or more of the above-mentioned events that the Courts have listed as constituting frustration. Additionally, it is the duty of the Court to make the necessary inference from the evidence led whether and when frustration has occurred. In other words, it is the Court that determines the existence of frustration from the facts pleaded and evidence led by the parties.
— S.O. Adeniyi, J. Nwabueze v. ABU Zaria (2023) – NICN/KD/34/2021