Force majeure is an event that prevents performance of the contract and cannot be attributed to a party. Pandemics, war, sanctions, and supply chain disruptions put international contracts under pressure. In our practice, we see entrepreneurs falling back on standard force majeure clauses that do not align with the reality of 2026. A good force majeure clause prevents you from being caught between a rock and a hard place when delivery or payment is no longer possible.
What is the legal problem?
Force majeure has a different definition depending on the legal system. Under Dutch law, an impediment that cannot be attributed to you suffices. Under French law, force majeure requires unforeseeability and inevitability. Under common law, force majeure exists only as a contractual agreement via frustration or an express clause. Anyone using the same force majeure clause worldwide without coordination will obtain divergent results.
What does the law say?
Under Dutch law, Article 6:75 of the Civil Code stipulates that failure to perform in the event of force majeure cannot be attributed to the debtor. In the event of force majeure, no right to compensation arises (Article 6:74 of the Civil Code). Dissolution remains possible pursuant to Article 6:265 of the Civil Code. The Vienna Sales Convention (Article 79 CISG) regulates temporary relief in the event of an impediment beyond the control of the parties.
Under French law, Article 1218 of the Code Civil codifies force majeure. Under German law, Section 275 of the German Civil Code regulates impossibility. The ICC Force Majeure Clause 2020 offers an international model framework, with an additional Hardship Clause for imbalances.
What risks do companies face?
Without a force majeure clause, you run the risk of breach of contract in the event of unforeseen circumstances. Damage caused by a pandemic, sanctions, or transport interruptions will then be at your expense. A clause that is too broad facilitates abuse; one that is too narrow offers no protection. For sanctions issues (EU Regulation 833/2014 for Russia), a specific sanctions clause is often more effective than general force majeure.
Practical example from our practice
We advised a Dutch importer on a purchase contract with a Chinese manufacturer. Due to new US sanctions, the manufacturer was no longer allowed to supply an affiliated Iranian customer. The old contract contained a vague force majeure clause. The Chinese manufacturer wanted to terminate the contract without compensation; our client suffered significant damage. Upon renegotiation, we incorporated the ICC Force Majeure Clause 2020, explicitly excluding sanctions as a ground for force majeure on the part of the supplier. Dispute resolution route via NAI arbitration in The Hague.
What can you do?
Include a comprehensive force majeure clause that explicitly names pandemics, war, sanctions, export restrictions, and cyber incidents. Regulate the consequences: suspension, termination, price revision, or renegotiation. Add a duty of notification and a burden of proof. Combine with a hardship clause for prolonged disruption. Align with Section 6:75 of the Dutch Civil Code or applicable law. Have the clause reviewed annually by an international trade lawyer. See also our article on Hardship Clauses: protection against economic changes.