of the street to watch the coronation. When the coronation was cancelled, he refused to pay. The judge ruled that the flat had been rented out for the sole purpose of watching the coronation, so the cancellation made the contract impossible to fulfil. Mr Henry did not have to pay. This way of ending a contract is known as frustration.
These and other coronation cases (e.g. Chandler v Webster) continue to be legal precedents in the doctrine of frustration of contracts a doctrine which remains of significance today. See "Contract Law - Doctrine of Frustration." Frustration arises when there is a contract but a subsequent event makes it illegal to perform the contract or it is impossible to perform it or, what is more problematic, where the contractual obligation has become significantly different from that agreed (i.e. frustration of the contractual purpose). The fact that the subsequent event has made it more expensive to perform the contract does not amount to frustration and the event must have arisen for a reason beyond the control of the parties. If there is frustration then the parties are discharged from future obligations.