For decades, international trade and commerce has been directly affected by the impact of geopolitical realities, political tensions, armed conflicts, economic sanctions, and regional instability. These events have always shaped how the trade and commerce react, whether it is the performance of contracts, their validity or their enforceability in case of disputes. In an increasingly interconnected world, even the ripple effects of such disruptions extend far beyond the immediate area of conflict.
The consequences of such tension are not confined to mere physical disruptions alone. The cascading effects manifest in circumstances that result in the inability of parties to perform their contractual obligations. These disruptions often occur in circumstances that neither party could have reasonably foreseen at the time the agreement was concluded.
The recent events affecting the Gulf Cooperation Countries (GCC) serve as a reminder that geopolitical uncertainty can rapidly destabilize supply chains, restrict trade routes, and long-standing contractual arrangements not only in the affected area of conflict but across the globe. This, in turn, reinstates the fact that trade and commerce must not only focus on operational and commercial mechanics, but also on legal frameworks designed to address such situations where performance becomes impossible. Among these, the doctrine of force majeure remains one of the most effective tools governing such contracts during times of uncertainty.
The term ‘force majeure’, often described as ‘superior force’ or ‘act of god’, refers to the extraordinary events that are beyond the reasonable foresight of the contracting parties, which render the performance of a contract impossible. This doctrine functions as a risk-mitigating mechanism, recognizing that certain events are beyond reasonable human foresight, and hence, enforcing a strict contractual liability would be both impossible and unreasonable in times of uncertainty.
This doctrine not only allows the parties to temporarily suspend or entirely terminate the contractual obligations but also functions as a legal safeguard. The safeguards afforded by force majeure do not automatically operate. In most legal systems, such a provision must be expressly incorporated in the contract in order to be invoked by the parties. In some cases, courts traditionally apply the ‘doctrine of frustration’ with some restraint.
Therefore, a well-drafted force majeure clause plays a major role in commercial agreements. It not only provides the parties with a structured framework for addressing extraordinary events but also maintains certainty. The effectiveness of such a provision depends largely on how carefully it is drafted. A vaguely or too broadly worded provision may give rise to interpretative ambiguities, thereby undermining its utility at the very moment it is intended to operate. Accordingly, the clause should clearly define the range of events or triggers with respect to its application and must clearly outline the circumstances under which parties may invoke the provision. These events typically include wars, natural disasters, pandemics, and other extraordinary events that are beyond human foresight or reasonable control, and which directly or indirectly affect a normal business operation.
To understand the practical implications of such events and the Force Majeure clause, let’s consider a multinational manufacturer whose production depends on critical spare parts being sourced from a region suddenly impacted by geopolitical conflict. As a result, shipments may be delayed or blocked, production delayed, and contractual obligations to clients may be jeopardized.
In such a situation, a well-drafted force majeure clause allows both the supplier and the buyer to temporarily suspend obligations without triggering potential liability. This provides strategic flexibility and financial breathing space in times of uncertainty.
Hence, the value of a force majeure clause lies not just in suspension of obligations but in its ability to provide operational certainty, protection from unforeseen liability and strategic flexibility. By clearly defining triggering events, constructive notices, and resumption procedures, companies can navigate extraordinary disruptions while preserving long-term commercial relationships and minimizing risks.
Despite its broad scope, a force majeure clause does not extend to all forms of commercial difficulty. Time and again, courts and tribunals have consistently emphasised that the doctrine applies only where the performance of an obligation is impossible. Given the current geopolitical climate, global trade and commerce are undoubtedly exposed to uncertainty. This uncertainty should not result in institutional paralysis. Hence, all contractual arrangements governing such trade and commerce must provide a mechanism that allows businesses to navigate such extraordinary events while preserving the integrity of commercial contractual arrangements. Therefore, force majeure clauses, when carefully drafted and invoked, may serve as a powerful tool in times of such uncertainty.
About the authors: Shehbaazali Fazalbhoy (CS) is an Associate Partner at Water and Shark Legal UAE and Vikshita Poojary is an Associate at Water and Shark Legal India.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s). The opinions presented do not necessarily reflect the views of Bar & Bench.
If you would like your Deals, Columns, Press Releases to be published on Bar & Bench, please fill in the form available here.