header-logo header-logo

02 June 2011 / Alison Mayfield
Issue: 7468 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Force of nature

Alison Mayfield examines the frustrations of force majeure

The common law doctrine of frustration comes into play when a contract becomes impossible to perform, or can only be performed in a way that is substantially different from what was originally set out in the contract. The effect is that the parties to the contract will be excused from further performance under the contract. However, frustration only applies in the absence of an express provision by the parties dealing with such events. Such a clause is usually called a force majeure clause.

What is force majeure?

Force majeure is literally translated as: superior forces. In common language it is an unexpected and disruptive event that may operate to excuse a party from their obligations under a contract. Force majeure is only recognised in English law if it is specifically provided for in the terms of a contract.

Why have a force majeure clause?

The purpose of a force majeure clause is to define, more or less precisely, the circumstances in which a party to a contract can be excused from performing its contractual obligations,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll