Legal Definitions - coronation case

A coronation case is a historical legal term referring to a series of lawsuits that arose in England following the unexpected postponement of King Edward VII's coronation in 1902. The King's sudden illness led to the delay of the grand public ceremony and related festivities, causing a ripple effect on numerous contracts that had been made specifically in anticipation of the event.

These cases typically involved individuals or businesses who had entered into agreements—such as renting rooms with a prime view of the procession route, hiring services, or booking venues—with the express purpose of participating in or observing the coronation. When the event was postponed, parties to these contracts often sought to be released from their obligations, arguing that the entire reason for their agreement had been destroyed by the unforeseen delay. The courts were then tasked with determining whether these contracts were "frustrated," meaning an unforeseen event had made their performance impossible or radically different from what was originally intended, thereby excusing the parties from their duties. The coronation cases were instrumental in shaping the legal principle of frustration of contract.

Here are some examples illustrating the concept:

• Imagine a person who paid a significant sum to rent a balcony apartment for a specific weekend, clearly stating in the rental agreement that the purpose was to watch a highly anticipated annual city marathon pass directly below. A week before the event, the marathon is unexpectedly cancelled due to a sudden public health emergency. The renter then attempts to cancel the apartment booking and receive a refund, arguing that the sole reason for renting the apartment—viewing the marathon—no longer exists. The landlord, however, might contend that the apartment is still available for the agreed-upon dates, even without the marathon. This scenario mirrors a coronation case, where the central legal question would be whether the cancellation of the marathon fundamentally "frustrated" the contract's purpose, releasing the renter from their obligation.

• Consider a local catering company that signed a contract to provide all food and beverage services for a large, multi-day cultural festival. The contract specified the festival dates and location, and outlined the expected number of attendees. Just days before the event, the festival organizers announce its cancellation due to unforeseen permit issues. The catering company, having already purchased perishable supplies and scheduled staff, seeks compensation or release from the contract, arguing that the cancellation of the festival makes it impossible to fulfill their agreement. The festival organizers might argue that the caterers could still potentially sell their prepared food elsewhere or that the contract didn't explicitly guarantee the festival would proceed. This situation is akin to a coronation case, as it involves a contract whose primary purpose is tied to a specific public event that is then called off, leading to a dispute over contractual obligations.

• A group of friends booked a luxury coach bus to transport them to a major international sporting event in a neighboring country, including a special pre-game hospitality package. The contract with the bus company detailed the specific game, date, and itinerary. Due to an unexpected political protest that blocks all major roads, the sporting event is indefinitely postponed just days before it was scheduled. The friends want to cancel their bus booking and receive a full refund, asserting that the sole purpose of hiring the bus—attending the game—is now impossible. The bus company, having allocated resources and turned down other bookings, might argue that the bus is still available for transport, even if the game isn't happening, or that the contract didn't guarantee the game would proceed. This mirrors a coronation case, where the cancellation of the central event (the game) raises the question of whether the contract for related services (the bus and hospitality) is legally "frustrated."