Which of the following can lead to the termination of a contract due to impossibility of performance?

The concept of impossibility of performance refers to situations where fulfilling the terms of a contract becomes impossible, thereby allowing parties to terminate the contract without liability. The total destruction of the subject matter is a classic example of this principle. If the subject matter—such as a home, piece of land, or item being sold—has been totally destroyed, it is no longer possible for either party to perform their obligations under the contract, as the very basis for the agreement has been obliterated.

In contrast, an agreement by both parties to terminate a contract, while it does end the contract, does not fall under the notion of impossibility. Similarly, the enactment of a new law may affect the contract but does not automatically make performance impossible; rather, it may require renegotiation or adaptation. Lastly, if one party breaches the contract, this does not constitute impossibility of performance; it means that the contract is still technically viable, although one party has failed to meet their obligations. Thus, the total destruction of the subject matter is the only circumstance here that fits the definition of impossibility of performance, justifying termination of the contract.