Force majeure definition: everything you need to know in 2026

A supplier can no longer deliver because a flood has destroyed its warehouse. A commercial tenant wants to suspend its rent after an administrative closure. A building contractor falls behind because a storm has halted the site for three weeks. In all these cases, the same question arises: can a party escape contractual liability by invoking force majeure? The answer is never automatic. This guide explains what force majeure is in law since the reform of contract law, the conditions in which it applies, what it does not allow, and how to anticipate it in a contract.

Force majeure definition: what Article 1218 of the French Civil Code says

Before 2016, force majeure was not based on any single statutory definition. It resulted from case law, which traditionally required three characteristics: an event that is external, unforeseeable and irresistible. Ordinance No. 2016-131 of 10 February 2016, ratified by Law No. 2018-287 of 20 April 2018, codified the notion in Article 1218 of the French Civil Code, which applies to all contracts entered into from 1 October 2016.

"In contractual matters, force majeure occurs where an event beyond the debtor's control, which could not reasonably have been foreseen when the contract was entered into and whose effects cannot be avoided by appropriate measures, prevents the debtor from performing its obligation." (Article 1218, paragraph 1)

This definition of force majeure sets three cumulative conditions, meaning that all of them must be met at the same time. If even one is missing, force majeure is ruled out and the debtor remains bound to perform or to pay compensation. The text has slightly shifted the vocabulary of earlier case law: it refers to an event "beyond the control" of the debtor, which "could not reasonably have been foreseen" and whose effects "cannot be avoided by appropriate measures". Behind these words lie the three criteria that we set out in detail below.

Why this notion matters so much

Force majeure is not a technical detail. It conditions contractual liability. In principle, a party that does not perform its obligation owes damages to its counterparty, on the basis of Article 1231-1 of the French Civil Code. That same provision contains an exception: the debtor is released "where the non-performance is due to a case of force majeure". In other words, force majeure is a ground for exemption from liability. It shifts the burden of risk: it is no longer the defaulting debtor who bears the consequences of non-performance, but the creditor who will not receive the expected performance. The remedies available to a creditor faced with non-performance by its counterparty are set out in our article on contractual non-performance.

The three cumulative conditions of force majeure

For an event to constitute force majeure, three criteria must be met. Case law assesses these conditions concretely, case by case, and rather strictly.

Externality, or the event beyond the debtor's control

The event must be external to the person invoking force majeure. It must not result from that person's act, fault or negligence. A manager who has not maintained his or her equipment cannot invoke the breakdown as force majeure: the cause lies with him or her. Likewise, a strike within the company, triggered by an industrial dispute that the employer helped to bring about, is generally not external.

The wording of Article 1218, "beyond the debtor's control", covers this idea of externality. A natural event (storm, flood, earthquake), an act of the authorities (fait du prince) (administrative prohibition, embargo) or the act of a wholly unconnected third party may meet this condition. By contrast, the debtor's financial difficulties, its own disorganisation or the default of a subcontractor that it freely chose are rarely regarded as external.

Unforeseeability at the date the contract was entered into

The event must not have been reasonably foreseeable when the contract was signed. The time of assessment is essential: the relevant date is the date of conclusion, not the date of non-performance. A risk that was known and foreseeable at the time of commitment cannot later be invoked as force majeure.

This condition explains some solutions that are at times harsh. Where an epidemic has already been declared and is widely reported, a contract signed after its appearance can no longer treat it as an unforeseeable event. This is one of the lessons drawn from the disputes arising out of the health crisis: for contracts entered into after the pandemic broke out, the argument of unforeseeability became difficult to sustain. Unforeseeability is also assessed in abstracto, by reference to what a reasonable person in the same situation could have anticipated.

Irresistibility, or the impossibility of avoiding the effects

This is the most demanding condition. The event must make performance impossible, and not merely more difficult or more costly. Article 1218 states that the effects must not be capable of being "avoided by appropriate measures". The debtor must therefore show that it did everything possible to overcome the obstacle and that no reasonable alternative solution existed.

A fundamental distinction follows: an increase in the cost of performance does not constitute force majeure. If delivery remains physically possible but becomes much more expensive, the obligation subsists. Likewise, if a supplier can source elsewhere, even on less favourable terms, performance is not impossible. Irresistibility requires an actual impediment, total or at least serious enough to prevent performance of the obligation.

The effects of force majeure on the contract

Once force majeure is established, its consequences vary depending on whether the impediment is temporary or permanent. Article 1218, paragraph 2, deals with these two situations.

"If the impediment is temporary, performance of the obligation is suspended unless the resulting delay justifies termination of the contract. If the impediment is permanent, the contract is terminated by operation of law and the parties are released from their obligations under the conditions provided for in Articles 1351 and 1351-1."

Suspension in the case of a temporary impediment

Where the event temporarily prevents performance, the obligation is suspended for as long as the obstacle lasts. The debtor is not at fault during this period, and the contract resumes its course once the impediment is lifted. A storm that interrupts a building site for a few weeks suspends the contractor's obligation without engaging its liability for that delay. The contract is not extinguished; it is simply frozen.

The text does however set a limit: if the delay is such that it deprives the contract of any interest for the creditor, termination may be ordered. A suspension that drags on can therefore result in the contract being brought to an end.

Termination in the case of a permanent impediment

If the impediment is permanent, the contract is terminated by operation of law. The parties are released from their obligations. Termination for force majeure then raises the question of the restitution of performances already rendered, governed by Articles 1351 and 1351-1 of the French Civil Code, which refer to the regime of the theory of risk. In principle, a debtor released by force majeure cannot claim payment of the counter-performance: res perit debitori, the thing perishes for the debtor of the obligation that has become impossible.

Force majeure, change of circumstances (imprévision) and fortuitous event (cas fortuit): not to be confused

Several neighbouring notions are regularly confused. Distinguishing them is essential in order to invoke the right mechanism.

Force majeure and change of circumstances

Change of circumstances (imprévision), introduced by Article 1195 of the French Civil Code in the 2016 reform, addresses a different situation. It applies where an unforeseeable change of circumstances makes performance excessively onerous for one party, without making it impossible. Force majeure requires impossibility of performance; imprévision requires only an upheaval of the economic balance.

The consequences also differ. Imprévision first opens a renegotiation phase: the affected party may ask its counterparty to revisit the terms of the contract. If that fails, the parties may agree to terminate, or apply to the court to adapt or end the contract. Force majeure, by contrast, operates mechanically through suspension or termination, with no renegotiation phase. A manufacturer facing a surge in raw material prices will fall under imprévision rather than force majeure, since delivery remains possible, but at a loss. The mechanism of imprévision and the drafting of a hardship clause in contracts between businesses are analysed in our dedicated article.

Force majeure and fortuitous event

The terms "force majeure" and "cas fortuit" are today often used as synonyms in French civil law. Article 1218 does not distinguish between the two. Historically, some authors reserved cas fortuit for internal events and force majeure for external events, but this distinction no longer has any practical effect under the current regime.

Force majeure and the guarantee against defects or the safety obligation

Certain special regimes govern force majeure more strictly. In contracts carrying an enhanced obligation of result, or where a text provides for strict liability, exemption through force majeure may be limited to events presenting all the required characteristics, or even excluded. A carrier, for example, is exempt only under restricted conditions. The regime applicable to the contract concerned must therefore always be checked before reasoning on Article 1218 alone.

Cases of force majeure: concrete examples and limits

The question practitioners ask is often simple in appearance: is this event a case of force majeure? The answer always depends on a concrete analysis of the three conditions, but some trends emerge. On the method for identifying cases of force majeure, see also our article specifically devoted to them.

Events often recognised

Certain events frequently meet the criteria, subject to case-by-case assessment:

• major natural disasters (flood, exceptional storm, earthquake) where they make performance physically impossible
• an act of the authorities (fait du prince), that is, an unforeseeable administrative decision or regulatory measure that prohibits performance (administrative closure, embargo, export ban)
• certain collective movements external to the company and of exceptional scale
• the death of the debtor where the obligation was strictly personal in nature

Events often rejected

Conversely, several situations are regularly rejected by the courts:

• the financial difficulties and insolvency of the debtor, which are neither external nor equivalent to an impossibility
• a mere increase in the cost of raw materials, energy or transport, which may fall under imprévision but not force majeure
• the default of a subcontractor or supplier freely chosen, unless it is shown that this default itself resulted from a case of force majeure
• ordinary illness of the debtor where replacement arrangements were possible

The particular case of epidemics

An epidemic is not, in itself and automatically, a case of force majeure. The health crisis that began in 2020 illustrated this: the courts refused any solution of principle and required, in each dispute, proof of the three conditions. For a contract entered into before the virus appeared, unforeseeability could be accepted; for a contract signed afterwards, it became open to challenge. Above all, many obligations, in particular the payment of a sum of money, remained possible despite the crisis, which caused the condition of irresistibility to fail. A commercial tenant faced with an administrative closure thus often saw its force majeure argument rejected, on the ground that the obligation to pay rent remained capable of performance.

Force majeure does not release a party from the obligation to pay a sum of money

This is an essential and widely accepted point: the debtor of a payment obligation cannot, in principle, be exempted by force majeure. The reasoning is simple: a sum of money can always be paid, and money is not affected by an external event in the same way as a physical performance. Force majeure therefore protects above all the debtor of an obligation to do or to deliver, and much more rarely the debtor of an obligation to pay.

The force majeure clause in the contract

Article 1218 of the French Civil Code is not a mandatory public policy rule (ordre public). The parties may therefore adjust the force majeure regime by contract, widen or narrow its scope, and organise its consequences. This is the purpose of the force majeure clause, found in most business contracts.

Why draft a tailored clause

A good force majeure clause in a contract gives the parties certainty by removing the uncertainty linked to judicial assessment. In particular, it allows the parties to:

• draw up a list of events expressly classified as force majeure (epidemic, cyberattack, shortage, administrative decision), while specifying whether the list is exhaustive or indicative
• define a notification procedure, with a time limit for informing the counterparty that the event has occurred
• provide for each party's obligations during the suspension, for example an obligation to cooperate or to limit loss
• set a duration threshold beyond which each party may terminate the contract

The drafting of this clause deserves real attention. A poorly calibrated list can backfire on the party that wanted it: if an event is not on the list and the list is exhaustive, it will be harder to invoke.

Limits on contractual adjustment

Freedom of contract is not total. In dealings between businesses and consumers, consumer law penalises clauses that create a significant imbalance. In business law, Article 1171 of the French Civil Code deems unwritten, in a standard-form contract (contrat d'adhésion), any clause that creates a significant imbalance between the parties' rights and obligations. Article L. 442-1 of the French Commercial Code also allows a significant imbalance between commercial partners to be penalised. A force majeure clause that is too favourable to one party can therefore be challenged.

How to invoke force majeure in practice

Invoking force majeure requires a rigorous approach, failing which the argument may be rejected for reasons of form as much as substance.

The first step is to check the contract itself: does it contain a force majeure clause, and what does it provide in terms of definition, notification and effects? The clause takes precedence over the default regime of Article 1218. The second step is to analyse the three conditions in relation to the precise event: externality, unforeseeability at the date of conclusion, and impossibility of performing despite appropriate measures. The third step is to assemble the evidence: it is for the debtor invoking force majeure to prove it. The debtor should keep every item establishing the reality of the event, its unforeseeable nature and the measures taken to try to perform nonetheless (search for alternative suppliers, quotes, written exchanges).

Finally, notice to the counterparty must be given promptly, in writing, ideally by registered letter or by any means that allows the information to be dated. The debtor's silence or passivity may be interpreted as a waiver of the right to rely on force majeure or as a breach of its duty of good faith, enshrined in Article 1104 of the French Civil Code.

Conclusion: a demanding notion, to be handled with method

Force majeure is often invoked and rarely recognised. French courts apply it strictly and require all three cumulative conditions to be met, with particular vigilance on irresistibility, that is, the real impossibility of performing. The most frequent error is to confuse performance that has become difficult or costly, which at best falls under imprévision, with performance that has become impossible, which alone can establish force majeure. Another trap is to believe that force majeure releases a party from paying a sum of money, which the law in principle refuses.

For a business, the best protection lies not in litigation but in drafting. Before signing an important contract, have your force majeure clause drafted or reviewed by a professional: a clause that is precise on definition, notification and effects is better than a long later debate before the court. And if an event prevents you from performing, do not remain passive: document the event, keep the evidence of your efforts to perform, and notify your counterparty in writing immediately.

Frequently asked questions

Is force majeure defined by law?

Yes. Since Ordinance No. 2016-131 of 10 February 2016, force majeure has been defined in Article 1218 of the French Civil Code for contracts entered into from 1 October 2016. The text requires an event beyond the debtor's control, which could not reasonably have been foreseen when the contract was entered into, and whose effects cannot be avoided by appropriate measures. Before this reform, the notion rested solely on case law.

What are the three conditions of force majeure?

Three cumulative conditions must be met: externality (the event is beyond the debtor's control), unforeseeability (the event could not reasonably have been foreseen when the contract was signed), and irresistibility (the effects could not be avoided by appropriate measures and make performance impossible). If any one of these conditions is lacking, force majeure is ruled out. The courts assess them concretely and rather strictly.

Is a price increase a case of force majeure?

No, in principle. A rise in the cost of raw materials, energy or transport makes performance more onerous but not impossible, which does not satisfy the condition of irresistibility. This situation may fall under imprévision, provided for in Article 1195 of the French Civil Code, which gives a right to renegotiate the contract. Force majeure and imprévision are two distinct mechanisms that must not be confused.

Can force majeure be invoked to avoid paying a debt?

No, in principle. An obligation to pay a sum of money can always be performed, since money is not affected by an external event in the way a physical performance is. Force majeure protects above all the debtor of an obligation to do or to deliver. This is one of the reasons why many commercial tenants were unable to invoke force majeure to suspend their rent during the health crisis.

Is Covid-19 a case of force majeure?

Not automatically. An epidemic is not in itself a case of force majeure: the three conditions must be shown to be met, contract by contract. Unforeseeability depends in particular on the date the contract was entered into, before or after the virus appeared. Irresistibility requires a real impossibility of performing, which was often lacking, in particular for payment obligations.

What happens in the case of temporary force majeure?

Under Article 1218, paragraph 2, of the French Civil Code, a temporary impediment suspends performance of the obligation for as long as the obstacle lasts, without engaging the debtor's liability. The contract then resumes its normal course. However, if the delay becomes such that it deprives the contract of any interest for the creditor, termination of the contract may be ordered.

Can force majeure be provided for in a contract?

Yes. Article 1218 is not a mandatory public policy rule, so the parties may adjust it by a force majeure clause. This clause may list the events concerned, set up a notification procedure, specify the effects of the suspension and set a duration threshold allowing termination. Such adjustment remains subject to the rules on significant imbalance, in particular Article 1171 of the French Civil Code and Article L. 442-1 of the French Commercial Code.