DW owned a building in a large capital city and granted a license to OM to display advertising and promotional materials on a large billboard on the roof. The license was for 8 years at a monthly rental of $14,000. Later a new building was constructed on vacant land next door that partially obstructed the billboard. OM’s advertising revenue was greatly reduced as a result. There was no term in the agreement that covered this situation. Can OM argue frustration to avoid making further payments as a licensee?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Solution Issue Dm had an ownership of building in the large capital city OM consulted DM for display... View the full answer