• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제33권
• /
• pp.221-243
• /
• 2007

A party to a contract is bound to perform its contractual duties. But outside events may make performance impossible, physically or legally. In such a situation a party may wish to plead "force majeure" as an excuse for failure to perform. The laws of most countries have provisions which dealt with force majeure. These provisions, however, vary from country to country and may not meet the parties' requirement in international contracts. Therefore, parties to international contracts are frequently in need of contract clauses on force majeure. There are many force majeure clauses in standard forms or individually negotiated. The ICC has drawn up provisions which aim at providing assistance for parties when they are making contracts. The force majeure clause grants relief from contractual sanctions and includes provisions for suspension and termination of contract. The purpose of this study is to examine "ICC Force Majeure Clause 2003" in the international sales contract. For this purpose, firstly this study deals with the major contents of the ICC Force Majeure Clause 1985 and 2003. Secondly this study considers the related provisions under CISG, PICC, PECL and the force majeure clause in Model International Sale Contract. Thirdly this study compares ICC Force Majeure Clause 2003 with the relative provisions under CISG, PICC, PECL and the force majeure clause in Model International Sale Contract. It should be noted that the parties often need to adapt the content of this clause so as to take account of the particular circumstances of the individual contract. This paper contributes to help the parties to a contract to draft the meaningful "Force Majeure Clause" containing more precise and elaborate provisions.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.179-199
• /
• 2016

There is legal relation between both parties after contract formation. The parties are liable for performing each duties but a party is not liable for a failure to perform the duties if party proves that the failure was due to the force majeure. The forec majeure has different concepts and legal principles such as change circumstance, hardship, frustration, impediment and so on. Therefore, it need to analyze a historical background and their presence in various domestic legal systems. Although the CISG describes Art. 79 impediment instead of using the force majeure, the impediment has several interpretative limitation. The CISG pursue to harmonize divergent legal concepts and principles from various national laws and legal systems but the harmonization of legal systems make the impediment more confused. The article goes on to analyzes about limitation of the impediment and reviews to examine the force majeure and hardship in PICC. Thus both parties of international contract insert hardship clause in order to prevent the problem of judgment in a court or a court of arbitration under impediment of CISG.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제26권7호
• /
• pp.167-184
• /
• 2022

Purpose - This paper analyzes all possible issues that need to be considered in case disputes occur with regard to force majeure in international commercial contracts through the comparative study between English and Korean during COVID-19. Design/methodology - This paper belongs to the field of explanatory legal study, which aims to explain and test whether the choice of law is linked to the conditions that occur in the reality of judicial practice. The juridical approach involves studying and examining theories, concepts, legal doctrines, and legislation that are related to the problem. Findings - English law does not permit general economic impracticability to qualify as a valid force majeure event. If a party asserts that they were prevented from performing the contract, the courts will examine this strictly. Many commercial contracts in a broad range of sectors and industries are chosen by parties to be governed by English law. With COVID-19, there have been discussion of parties being released from performance as a result of force majeure. Meanwhile, under Korean law, a force majeure event should be unforeseeable and beyond a party's control. Since COVID-19 is a known event for future contracts, to avoid the risk that a similar situation in the future is deemed foreseeable and under a party's control, parties must ensure that such a risk is properly addressed in a contract. Therefore, it is necessary to have a new clause to cover a pandemic. Originality/value - In light of the ongoing unexpected and uncertain economic impacts COVID-19 is expected to bring to the world, it is anticipated that companies will experience an increased number of claims involving force majeure around the world, including English and Korea. As such, taking proactive steps to assess the applicable legal principles, including the concept of force majeure of contract, will help companies be prepared for the financial or legal implications of COVID-19. In this regard, it would be advisable for companies and businesses to take specific actions.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권3호
• /
• pp.21-33
• /
• 2020

This study aims to determine if the current COVID-19 event can be admitted as an excuse for non-performance in international trade transactions. In order to do so, this study selected case study method in the analysis. Firstly, the definitions of Force Majeure addressed in CISG, UCC, Chinese Law, and Korean Law were organized. Secondly, this study reviewed the avian influenza event in 2006 and the natural disaster event occurred in Guangdong, China, in 2017. In the study, three critical evaluation factors are suggested in order to be admitted as a Force Majeure event in international transactions as following: 1) possibility of foresight of the event, 2) possibility to overcome and avoid the event, and 3) the enterprise's countermeasures of the event. As an implication, this study organized the definitions of Force Majeure that were indicated in various kinds of Laws and suggested the basic framework to analyze the possibility of admittance as a Force Majeure event.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제18권
• /
• pp.27-62
• /
• 2002

The international sale contract is the central contracts in export-import transactions. A good sale contract or set of general conditions of sale will cover all the principal elements of the transaction, so that uncertainties are avoided. The parties' respective duties as concern the payment mechanism, transport contract and insurance responsibilities, inter alia, will all be clearly detailed in the contract. The following key clauses should be included in international contracts of sale and general conditions of sale: ${\bullet}$ preamble ${\bullet}$ identification of parties ${\bullet}$ description of goods ${\bullet}$ price and payment conditions ${\bullet}$ delivery periods and conditions ${\bullet}$ inspection of the goods - obligations and limitations ${\bullet}$ quantity or quality variations in the products delivered ${\bullet}$ reservation of title and passing of property rights ${\bullet}$ transfer of risk - how accomplished ${\bullet}$ seller's warranties and buyer's complaints ${\bullet}$ assignment of rights ${\bullet}$ force majeure clause and hardship clause ${\bullet}$ requirement that amendments and modifications be in writing ${\bullet}$ choice of law ${\bullet}$ choice of dispute resolution mechanism Under most systems of law, a party can be excused from a failure to perform a contract obligation which is caused by the intervention of a totally unforeseeable event, such as the outbreak of war, or an act of God such as an earthquake or hurricane. Under the American commercial code (UCC) the standard for this relief is one of commercial impracticability. In contrast, many civil law jurisdictions apply the term force majeure to this problem. Under CISG, the standard is based on the concept of impediments to performance. Because of the differences between these standards, parties might be well advised to draft their own force majeure, hardship, or excusable delays clause. The ICC publication, "Force Majeure and Hardship" provides a sample force majeure clause which can be incorporated by reference, as well as a hardship clause which must be expressly integrated in the contract. In addition, the ICC Model provides a similar, somewhat more concise formulation of a force majeure clause. When the seller wishes to devise his own excusable delays clause, he will seek to anticipate in its provision such potential difficulties as those related to obtaining government authorisations, changes in customs duties or regulations, drastic fluctuations in labour, materials, energy, or transportation prices, etc.

• 한국항만경제학회지
• /
• 제21권3호
• /
• pp.219-238
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study is to analyze the concept, requirement and the effect of Force majeure and Hardship under the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contract. Under the UNIDROIT Principles Non-performance by a party is excused if that party proves that the non-performance was due to an impediment beyond its control and that it could not reasonably be expected to have taken the impediment into account at the time of the conclusion of the contract or to have avoided or overcome it or its consequence. There is hardship where the occurrence of events fundamentally alters the equilibrium of the contracts and the events occur or become known to the disadvantaged party after the conclusion of the contract; the events could not reasonably have been taken ito account by the disadvantaged party at the time of the conclusion of the contract; the events are beyond the control of the disadvantaged party; and the risk of the events was not assumed by the disadvantaged party.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제31권1호
• /
• pp.37-62
• /
• 2016

상법 제931조 4호에 불가항력에 관한 조항은 두가지 문제점을 내포하고 있다. 첫째, 그 적용 범위에 있어 명확하지 않으며, 둘째, 동조 1호의 열거된 면책사유와 불가항력은 중첩적 가능성이 제기될 수 있다. 불가항력이란 자연재해 및 제3자로 인한 외부적 영향에 의한 경우를 뜻한다. 후자의 해석으로 인한, 제3자의 외부적 영향으로 발생한 사건이라는 해석은 굉장히 광범위하고 포괄적인 의미인데, 이는 집행자의 해석에 따라 각각에 적용되기에 그 기준의 명확성에 대해 의심해 볼 여지가 있다. 더욱이 항공기사고로 인한 (지상) 제3자의 손해는 그 발생빈도가 적고, 또한 이는 신설조항으로 그 분석과 적용에 대한 연구는 필요하다. 하여 외부적 행위로 인하여 (지상) 제3자에게 (비계약적) 손해가 발생하였다면, 그 손해의 범위의 기준을 마련하는 것이 법률적용의 명확성에 있어 바람직하지 않을까 사료된다. 불가항력으로 인한 항공기운항자의 면책은 항공기운항자의 산업보호라는 입장에서 필요한 조항이 될 수도 있다. 반대로 이는 언제나 피해자의 보호법익과 상충된다. 하여, 법률적 보호에 있어 가장 우선시 고려해야 할 사항은 누구의 보호법익이 우선적으로 고려되어야 할 것인가 이므로, 기업보호라는 측면도 결코 간과할 수 없는 부분이지만, 예상치 못한 피해를 받은 항공기사고로 인한 (지상) 제3자의 보호는 기업보호에 앞서 담보되어야 할 보호법익이다. 다음으로 중첩적 가능성이란, 상법 제931조의 1호와 4호이다. 1호에 정치, 경제적 이유로 발생된 사건에 대한 면책이라는 규정을 두고 있는데, 이는 4호의 불가항력에 대한 해석과 맞물릴 수 있다. 위에서 설명한대로 불가항력의 해석상, 제3자의 외부적 영향의 원인으로 경치 경제적 이유로 발생되어지는 일련의 사건을 포함한다고 볼 수 있으므로, 이에 대한 중복적 규정이라는 의문이 생긴다. 결론적으로 향후에 발생하게 될 규정의 구체화와 양 당사자 간의 균형있는 보호를 위하여 이에 관한 고려가 필요하다고 사료된다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제9권
• /
• pp.45-82
• /
• 1996

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제43권3호
• /
• pp.199-218
• /
• 2018

국제물품매매 거래에서 불가항력은 당사자의 통제를 벗어나는 상황으로 인해 계약의 불이행이 발생하는 경우 책임소재와 분쟁해결을 위한 계약서의 명시조항으로 널리 사용되고 있다. 본 연구는 FTA 특혜관세 적용과정에서 발생할 수 있는 불가항력(예외적인 경우)에 대한 판단기준과 이와 관련된 한·ASEAN FTA와 한·EU FTA 검증과정에서 제기된 사례를 살펴보았으며, 이를 통해 동 FTA를 활용하여 특혜관세 혜택을 향유하고자 하는 무역기업에 다음과 같은 시사점을 제시하고자 한다. 먼저 한·ASEAN FTA와 한·EU FTA에서 규정하고 있는 특혜관세 배제조항의 확인과 관세당국의 예외적인 경우에 대한 판단기준을 파악하여야 한다. 그리고 원산지증명서의 유효기간에 대한 유예기준 확인과 수출국 관세당국의 검증결과 회신기준을 확인하여야 한다. 마지막으로 관세당국의 검증결과 회신 미요청 행위에 대한 신의성실의 원칙 위배여부를 확인하여야 한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제44권
• /
• pp.57-84
• /
• 2009

This Study attempts to compare and analyze on Principle of Change Circumstances under th CISG, PICC and PECL which are covered international commercial contract. In many international commercial contract, time is very important because delays in performance are sanctioned heavily by substantial penalty clauses. When change in circumstances affects contract performance, the contract will often not be suspended or terminated. Therefore, principle of change circumstances is being prepared of fluidity of contract environment and its effect in general. Taking into consideration the problems relating to the renegotiation or adaptation in the cases of radical change of circumstances where the CISG applies, it is suggested that the contracting parties should make clear their intentions, that is, whether they will provide for the possibility of renegotiation where the price of goods has been altered by inserting a hardship clause or for the possibility of mutual discharge from liability in the cases of economic impossibility or hardship by inserting a force majeure clause. Such provision will be desirable especially in situations where there is a long term contract, the price of goods sold tends to fluctuate in the international commerce, or where especially in contracts subjected to arbitration, the parties subject their contract to legal sources or principles of supranational character. Therefore, this study has shown that the hardship provisions in the CISG, PICC and PECL has similarities to each a validity defense and an excuse defense. it was provisions that CISG governs this issue in Article 79, PICC Article 6.2.1, 6.2.2, 6.2.3 and PECL Article 6.111.