In general, a state of health, such as cancer, would not be considered a case of force majeure. That is, sudden cancer diagnoses resemble force majeure events in that they are unpredictable and uncontrollable. Although some contracts contain a force majeure clause, they are unusual in other contracts, such as . B a marriage contract. Such events can threaten the legal status of force majeure and can create liabilities where none previously existed. Another question in contract law is whether the terms of the contract are respected in the event of an outbreak. In the world of construction contracts, terms referring to “force majeure” are commonplace. “Force majeure events” – also known as force majeure events – are natural disasters (or other destructive events) that are completely beyond human control. Common examples of force majeure include hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, and tsunamis. Catastrophic flooding can also be a force majeure event in which flooding in a particular area is unusual or dramatically worse than could reasonably have been expected – just like the floods that hit eastern Nebraska in March 2019. In contract law, force majeure can be interpreted as an implied defence under the impossibility or impossibility rule. If this is the case, the promise will be kept due to unforeseen events that were inevitable and would result in delays, costs or other insurmountable material violations.

In other contracts, such as indemnification. B, force majeure cannot be an excuse and in fact be the central risk that the promisor assumes – e.B. Flood insurance or crop insurance – the only variables are the timing and extent of damage. In many cases, failure by ignoring the obvious risks due to “natural phenomena” will not be enough to excuse the fulfillment of the obligation, even if the events are relatively rare: e.B. the year 2000 problem in computers. According to the Uniform Commercial Code 2-615, the non-delivery of the goods sold can be excused by a “case of force majeure” if the absence of such an act was a “basic hypothesis” of the contract and the act made the delivery “economically impracticable”. Droughts as forces of nature are generally understood as force majeure events. Government measures, including war, can also be considered cases of force majeure in many cases. However, you should understand that cases of force majeure are not limited to these categories.

In fact, many treaties explicitly describe what constitutes one of these events. Throughout the English language, force majeure[2] is a natural hazard beyond human control, such as an earthquake or tsunami, for which no one can be held responsible. Force majeure may constitute an exception to liability in contracts (as under the Hague-Visby Rules)[3] or it may constitute an “insured risk” in an insurance policy. [4] In the midst of the COVID-19 chaos, companies are relying on force majeure clauses in their contracts to avoid liability in the performance of their contractual obligations. The extent to which the force majeure clause releases them, in whole or in part, from their contractual obligations is unclear. In any case, it depends on the text of the contract itself. An act of God can mean many things to many people. But what does this mean legally? Our litigation group examines the many ways in which “force majeure” in legal contracts has been interpreted by law and jurisdiction. Many contracts contain provisions that exempt one or both parties from the performance of their contractual obligations due to the occurrence of an event beyond the control of the parties and making performance impossible or almost impossible. These provisions are provisions on “force majeure” and often list “force majeure” as one of the events that excuse the performance of the contract. A “force majeure event” within the meaning of a commercial contract is generally an extreme weather event such as a hurricane, snowstorm, flood or similar natural event.

The body of jurisprudence of the Act of God can be as confusing and unpredictable as The Actions of God Himself. Where is COVID-19? There is a lack of competence that interprets the language of force majeure in the context of pandemics or virus outbreaks. There is no doubt that parties whose contractual performance has been hindered by the coronavirus pandemic will invoke force majeure as a contractual or habitual defense, arguing that an unknown and unexpected natural phenomenon has occurred, so their non-performance of a contractual obligation should be excused. Meanwhile, parties who want to enforce contracts or impose liability can assume the economic consequences of the outbreak, arguing that the real crippling force was not the coronavirus, but its economic impact. An indication of the direction in the drafting of the contract may be the other events listed as force majeure: many courts that interpret the provisions on force majeure will rely on the specific examples of force majeure events to simplify the interpretation of broader terms, such as . B force majeure. Therefore, the decision as to whether a pandemic or virus outbreak can be a case of force majeure could depend on the other misfortunes that the parties have imagined to excuse obligations under the contract. In any case, it depends on the details of the language of the contract, the circumstances of non-performance and the degree of avoidance. What about certain legal outcomes? Only God knows. Alston & Bird has formed a multidisciplinary working group to advise its clients on the business and legal impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19). You can see all our work on the coronavirus in all sectors and subscribe to our future webinars and tips.

Even contracts that contain force majeure clauses risk being sued if the clauses are vague, generic or poorly worded. Indeed, in disputes relating to construction contracts, it is common for the parties to argue over events that are specifically “force majeure” or not. Disputes of this kind often depend on a judge`s decision as to whether the event in question was “reasonably foreseeable”. If the event was not reasonably foreseeable – such as the rapid melting of an unusually large amount of snow that causes the withdrawals to erupt and unprecedented flooding – then the event is likely to be considered a case of force majeure and the Party`s failure to perform, at least for a certain period of time, will be excused. If the event was reasonably foreseeable — such as a fifty-mile-per-hour wind gust blowing on I-80 — it will determine that the event is not force majeure, and the injured party will therefore not be excused for its non-performance. .

Have any question, Please enter the form below and click the submit button.

*

*

0 + 4 = ? Please enter the answer to the sum & Click Submit to verify your registration.