In which of the following cases was the law of frustration applied? A. Paradine v. Jane B. Taylor v.…

The doctrine of frustration was applied to discharge the contract in Taylor v. Caldwell (1863), where a music hall was accidentally destroyed by fire before the concert dates, and in Krell v. Henry (1903), where the cancellation of King Edward VII's coronation procession destroyed the foundation of a contract to hire a flat along the route. By contrast, in Paradine v. Jane (1647), the court rejected supervening impossibility as an excuse and laid down the strict rule of absolute contractual liability, holding the tenant liable for rent despite dispossession by an invading army. Similarly, in Cricklewood Property and Investment Trust Ltd. v. Leighton's Investment Trust Ltd. [1945] AC 221, the House of Lords held that wartime building restrictions did not frustrate a 99-year building lease.