Force majeure clauses play a critical role in mitigating risks arising from unforeseen events that hinder contractual performance. However, their interpretation and application often lead to dispu tes, especially in shipbuilding agreements where delays, cost overruns, and supply chain disruptions are common. This article examines the boundaries of force majeure in shipbuilding contracts, with a particular focus on the recent judgment in RTI Ltd v. MUR Shipping by exploring the key legal principles governing force majeure under English law and addressing the requirements of causation, contractual notice, and the duty to mitigate. It also highlights how courts assess force majeure claims, including considerations of alternative means of performance and good faith obligations. Additionally, the discussion extends to hardship clauses, which address situations where performance becomes excessively onerous but not impossible. Furthermore, the study assesses the implications of force majeure and hardship clauses on shipbuilding projects, considering factors such as regulatory changes, supplier insolvency, and global crises. It argues that carefully drafted contract provisions can help mitigate risks and provide legal certainty in complex commercial transactions. In conclusion, the article offers practical recommendations for drafting and negotiating force majeure and hardship clauses in shipbuilding contracts.
Fatih Buğra Erdem (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: