Now more than one year in, the COVID-19 pandemic continues to challenge global health, commerce, government, private organizations and our societal norms in nearly every respect. The dramatic and unprecedented measures employed to slow the spread of COVID-19 (e.g. travel restrictions, business closures, remote schooling, stay-at-home orders, quarantines) continue to force businesses and organizations into positions in which they are often unable to meet their contractual obligations.
Chair stacked Image

It will be months, and likely years before the legal and economic costs of the pandemic become fully apparent. There is however, a legal issue that became immediately apparent at the pandemic's outset: the application of contractual force majeure provisions. Generally, force majeure provisions excuse parties from performing under a contract when unforeseen events – such as a global pandemic – render performance impossible or impractical. But the scope and application of force majeure provisions depend on a variety of factors. Contracts differ greatly in how they define force majeure and what types of events will trigger a force majeure provision. Courts in various jurisdictions also differ greatly in how they construe force majeure provisions. And there are a variety of remedies and consequences that may arise from force majeure disputes. Simply put, the law of force majeure is far from uniform, and businesses must consider a number of factors when faced with force majeure issues.

This paper is an overview and analysis of force majeure issues in US state jurisdictions. It also includes a comparative analysis of force majeure themes in nine international jurisdictions.

Download the full PDF below.