Abstract

The outbreak of COVID-19 has severely impacted the performance of contracts across the globe. In some situations, the outbreak may render the performance of contracts impossible as a result of governmental restrictions in the form of national lockdowns to curb the spread of the virus. In other situations, the pandemic may adversely impact the execution of contractual obligations by dramatically affecting the price of the performance and, thus, resulting in hardship or commercial impracticability, while in certain situations the pandemic may be legally construed to not affect the performance of a contract. In domestic contracts, the consequences of such non-performance would depend on the principles of national law. In comparison, agreements with a foreign element (international contracts) are likely to increase the complexity of deciding claims arising from the non-performance of contracts due to the COVID-19 outbreak. The rights and liability of the parties would chiefly depend on the law that will govern the agreement – which differs across the globe. Some contracts would include a force majeure clause to exonerate the parties from performance on the occurrence of an event such as a pandemic. The courts’ interpretations of such force majeure clauses similarly differ across the globe. The laws of some countries would excuse the parties from performing their contractual obligations even if the pandemic resulted in hardship. Others would strictly construe the terms of such clauses and would invalidate them if the occurrence of the pandemic did not make the performance impossible. This paper examines the non-performance of transnational contracts due to the COVID-19 outbreak when they are governed by Indian law. It highlights the situations when an international contract for the sale of goods or services whose performance has been allegedly hindered due to COVID-19 would (a) frustrate and (b) breach the agreement under Indian law. The paper provides a comparative analysis of Indian law with jurisdictions such as France, Germany, Austria, China, the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States to demonstrate that Indian law is not well equipped to deal with complex lawsuits arising due to the non-performance of contracts as a result of the pandemic.

Highlights

  • The outbreak of COVID-19 has severely impacted the performance of contracts across the globe

  • The paper provides a comparative analysis of Indian law with jurisdictions such as France, Germany, Austria, China, the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States to demonstrate that Indian law is not well equipped to deal with complex lawsuits arising due to the non-performance of contracts as a result of the pandemic

  • The Indian Contract Act 1872 (ICA) does not adopt an asymmetrical approach as the Sale of Goods Act 1930 (SOGA) does, and it provides the seller and the buyer with equal rights to sue for fundamental breach and the consequent termination of the contract. Epidemics and pandemics such as COVID-19 have impacted the fabric of societies throughout history in a number of ways. Among other things, such incidents compel lawmakers to evaluate whether the legal principles applicable in their country are equipped to deal with the disputes that these outbreaks bring with them

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The outbreak of COVID-19 has severely impacted the performance of contracts across the globe. An inability to perform an international contract which is governed by the Indian law of contract due to mitigating circumstances caused by a situation such as the COVID19 outbreak would result in the “frustration” of an agreement if the occurrence of the pandemic was supervening, unforeseeable and destroyed the very purpose of the transaction.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call