SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Annales de la Faculté de Droit d’Istanbul / 2025 / Sayı: 77

The Impact of Force Majeure on Contracts for the International Sale of Commercial Goods Under Art. 79 of the CISG

Başak Başoğlu(PIRI REIS UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-4093-0136
Kadir Berk Kapancı(MEF UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-6540-5872
Pages
152–168
Publication Date
2026-01-21
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Furthermore, the paper will assess Article 79’s effectiveness in addressing force majeure and hardship scenarios, despite the absence of explicit references to these concepts within the CISG text.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) aims to harmonise inter0 national trade law by providing unified rules for sales contracts across its 970member countries, as of April 2025.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Despite its wide adoption, the CISG’s approach to non0performance and liability differs markedly from domestic legal systems, particularly those based on civil law traditions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Furthermore, the paper will assess Article 79’s effectiveness in addressing force majeure and hardship scenarios, despite the absence of explicit references to these concepts within the CISG text.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2025 Verileri
⚙️Variables:International Sales Law · Impediment Beyond Control · Force Majeure

Abstract

The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) aims to harmonise inter0 national trade law by providing unified rules for sales contracts across its 970member countries, as of April 2025. Despite its wide adoption, the CISG’s approach to non0performance and liability differs markedly from domestic legal systems, particularly those based on civil law traditions. The CISG provides that the debtor failing to perform their obligations must compensate for the loss, unless exempted under Article 79, which introduces the concept of “impediment beyond the debtor’s control” as a basis for exemption. For this exemption to apply, the impediment must be unforeseeable, unavoidable, and the direct cause of the failure to perform. However, these criteria make its application rare in practice, while its requirements have been satisfied in only a limited number of cases. This study examines Article 79 CISG in detail, exploring its stringent criteria and the challenges it presents in practice. Furthermore, the paper will assess Article 79’s effectiveness in addressing force majeure and hardship scenarios, despite the absence of explicit references to these concepts within the CISG text.

🔖

Cite This Article

Başoğlu, B., Kapancı, K. B. (2026). The Impact of Force Majeure on Contracts for the International Sale of Commercial Goods Under Art. 79 of the CISG. Annales de la Faculté de Droit d’Istanbul, Sayı: 77, 152–168. https://doi.org/10.26650/annales.2025.78.1682722

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (65)

  1. Atamer Y, ‘Article 79 CISG’, S. Kröll and L. Mistelis and P. Perales Viscasillas (eds), UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG)- A Commentary, (2nd edn, CH Beck/Hart/Nomos, 2018). google scholar
  2. CISG-AC Opinion No. 10, Agreed Sums Payable upon Breach of an ObLigation in CISG Contracts, Rapporteur: Dr. Pascal Hachem, Bar & google scholar
  3. Karrer AG, Zurich, SwitzerLand. Adopted by the CISG-AC following its 16th meeting in Wellington, New Zealand on 3 August 2012. google scholar
  4. CISG-AC Opinion No. 20, Hardship under the CISG, Rapporteur: Prof. Dr Edgardo Munoz, Universidad Panamericana, GuadaLajara, Mexico. Adopted by the CISG Advisory Council following its 27th meeting, in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico on 2-5 February 2020. google scholar
  5. CISG-AC Opinion No. 7, Exemption of Liability for Damages under Article 79 of the CISG, Rapporteur: Professor Alejandro M. Garro, ColumbiaUniversity School of Law, New York, N.Y.,USA. Adopted by the CISG-AC at its 11th meeting in Wuhan, PeopLe's RepubLic of China, on 12 October 2007. google scholar
  6. Enderlein F and Maskow D, International Sales Law (Oceana, 1992). google scholar
  7. Erdem E, ‘Revision of the ICC Force Majeure and Hardship Clause’, Eds: Fabio BortoLotti, Dorothy üfot, Hardship and Force Majeure in International Commercial Contracts, (International Chamber of Commerce, 2018). google scholar
  8. Erdem E, La Livraison des marchandises selon la Convention de Vienne, (Editions universitaires Fribourg, 1990). google scholar
  9. Flechtner HM, ‘Article 79 of the united Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) as Rorschach Test: The Homeward Trend and Exemption for DeLivering Non-Conforming Goods’, (2007) 19 Pace Int'L L. Rev. 29, Available at: https:// digitaLcommons.pace.edu/pilr/vol19/iss1/3.google scholar
  10. Flechtner HM, ‘The Exemption Provisions of the Sales Convention, IncLuding Comments on ‘Hardship’ Doctrine and the 19th June 2009 Decision of the Belgian Cassation Court’, (2011) 3 Belgrade Law Review, 84. google scholar
  11. Giunta L, ‘A Revision in Current Times of the Hardship and Force Majeure CLauses’, (2021) IL diritto marittimo, 693. google scholar
  12. Honnold J, Documentary History of the Uniform for International Sales (Kluwer, 1989). google scholar
  13. Huber P and Mullis A, The CISG: A New Texbook for Students and Practitioners, (Sellier European Law Pub, 2007). google scholar
  14. Janssen A and Wahnschaffe J, ‘Covid-19 and international sale contracts: unprecedented grounds for exemption or business as usual?’, (2021) Unif. L. Rev. 1. google scholar
  15. KeiL A, Die Haftungsbefreiung des Schuldners im UN-Kaufrecht, (Peter Lang, 1993). google scholar
  16. Lookofsky JM, The 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (The Hague, 2012). google scholar
  17. Magnus U, ‘Force Majeure and the CISG’, P. Šarčević and P.Volken (eds), The International Sale of Goods Revisited, (The Hague, 2001). google scholar
  18. Magnus U, Staudinger Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch: Wiener UN-Kaufrecht, (Sellier/deGruyter, 2005). google scholar
  19. Pichonnaz P, Impossibilité et Exorbitance: etude analytique des obstacles à l'exécution des obligations en droit suisse (art. 119 CO et 79 CVIM), (Fribourg: Éditions Universitaires Fribourg, 1997). google scholar
  20. Rimke J, ‘Force Majeure and Hardship: Application in International Trade Practice with Specific Regard to the CISG and the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts’ Pace International Law Review (ed) Review of the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (1999-2000), (Kluwer, 2001). google scholar
  21. Schwenzer I, ‘ArticLe 79 CISG’, P. SchLechtriem and I. Schwenzer (eds), Commentary on the UN Conventlon on the Internatlonal Sale of GooDs (CISG), (4th edn, OüP, 2016). google scholar
  22. Schwenzer I, ‘Force Majeure and Hardship in InternationaL SaLes Contracts’, (2008) 39 VüWLR, 709.google scholar
  23. StoLL H, ‘ArticLe 79 CISG’, P. Schlechtrlem (eD), Commentary on the UN Conventlon on the Internatlonal Sale of GooDs (CISG), (2nd Edn, OüP, 1998). google scholar
  24. Tallon T, ‘Article 79 CISG’ in CM. Bianca and MJ. Bonell (eds), Commentary on the Internatlonal Sales Law, (Giuffre, MiLan, 1987). google scholar
  25. American Arbitration Association, Macromex SrL. v. GLobex InternationaL Inc., 12 December 2007, 50181T 0036406, CISG-onLine No: 1647. google scholar
  26. Arbitration Court attached to the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, 10 December 1996-VB 96074, CISG-onLine No: 774. google scholar
  27. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 31 December 1996 - CISG/1996/58, CISG-onLine No: 1524. google scholar
  28. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 05 March 2005, CISG-onLine No: 5007. google scholar
  29. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 02 May 1996 - CISG/1996/21, CISG-onLine No: 1067. google scholar
  30. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 30 November 1997 - CISG/1997/33, CISG-onLine No: 1412. google scholar
  31. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 15 December 1998 - CISG/1998/09, CISG-onLine No: 1167. google scholar
  32. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 07 May 1997 - CISG/1997/11, CISG-onLine No: 1152. google scholar
  33. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 10 March 1995 - CISG/1995/04, CISG-onLine No: 1065. google scholar
  34. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 14 March 1996 - CISG/1996/14, CISG-onLine No: 1523. google scholar
  35. China InternationaL Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), 02 May 1996, CISG-onLine No: 1067. google scholar
  36. ICC, 01 January 2000 - 8790/2000, CLOüT Case No: 1085. google scholar
  37. Schiedsgericht der HandeLskammer Hamburg (Court of Arbitration of the Hamburg Chamber of Commerce), 21 March 1996-PartiaL Award (on the merits), CISG-onLine No: 187. google scholar
  38. Ukraine InternationaL CommerciaL Arbitration Court at the ükrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, 23 January 2012 - 218y/2011, CLOüT Case No: 1405.google scholar
  39. OberLandesgericht Wien (Vienna Higher RegionaL Court), 27 February 2017-1 R 207/16t, CISG-onLine No: 2814. google scholar
  40. Hof van Cassatie van BeLgie/Cour de cassation de BeLgique (BeLgian Supreme Court), 19 June 2009 - C.07.0289.N, CISG-onLine No: 1963. google scholar
  41. Rechtbank van KoophandeL HasseLt (CommerciaL Court HasseLt), 02 May 1995-AR 1849/94, CISG-onLine No: 371. google scholar
  42. Rechtbank van KoophandeL Tongeren (CommerciaL Court Tongeren), 25 January 2005 - A.R. A/04/01960, CISG-onLine No: 1106. google scholar
  43. Cour d'appeL de CoLmar (Court of AppeaL CoLmar), 12 June 2001-1 A 199800359, CISG-onLine No: 694.google scholar
  44. Cour de Cassation (French Supreme Court), 30 June 2004-Y 01-15.964, CISG-onLine No: 870. google scholar
  45. Landgericht Freiburg im Breisgau (District Court Freiburg), 22 August 2002-8 O 75/02, CISG-onLine No: 711. google scholar
  46. Landgericht BerLin (District Court BerLin), 15 September 1994-52 S 247/94, CISG-onLine No: 399.google scholar
  47. Bundesgerichtshof (German Supreme Court), 24 March 1999-VIII ZR 121/98, CISG-onLine No: 396.google scholar
  48. Bundesgerichtshof (German FederaL Supreme Court), 24 March 1999-VIII ZR 121/98, CLOüT Case No: 271. google scholar
  49. Amtsgericht CharLottenburg (LocaL Court CharLottenburg), 04 May 1994-7b C 34/94, CISG-onLine No: 386. google scholar
  50. OberLandesgericht Hamm (Hamm Higher RegionaL Court), 12 October 2001-13 ü 102/01, CISG-onLine No: 1430. google scholar
  51. Bundesgerichtshof (German Supreme Court), 09 January 2002-VIII ZR 304/00, CISG-onLine No: 651.google scholar
  52. OberLandesgericht Munich (Munich Higher RegionaL Court), 5 March 2008-7 ü 4969/06, CLOüT Case No: 1233. google scholar
  53. OberLandesgericht Hamburg (Hamburg Higher RegionaL Court), 4 JuLy 1997-1 ü 143/95, CISG-onLine 1299. google scholar
  54. TribunaLe di Monza (District Court Monza), 14 January 1993 - 4267/88, CISG-onLine No: 102. google scholar
  55. Rechtbank Maastricht (District Court Maastricht), 09 JuLy 2008-120428 / HA ZA 07-550, CISG-onLine No: 1748. google scholar
  56. Sentencia de La Audiencia ProvinciaL de Girona (Girona ProvinciaL High Court), 21 January 2016 - 80/2015, CLOüT case no: 1580. google scholar
  57. TribunaL Supremo (Spanish Supreme Court), 09 JuLy 2014 - 359/2014, CISG-onLine No: 2578. google scholar
  58. Amtsgericht Willisau (Lower Court), 12 March 2004-10 01 5, CLOUT Case No: 893. google scholar
  59. Handelsgericht des Kantons Aargau (Commercial Court Canton Aargau), 10 March 2010 - HOR.2008.42/rl/tv, CISG-online No: 2176. google scholar
  60. Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich (Commercial Court Canton Zurich), 10 February 1999-HG 970238.1, CISG-online No: 488. google scholar
  61. Handelsgericht Zurich (Commercial Court), 10 February 1999 - HG970238, CLOUT Case No: 331.google scholar
  62. Tribunale d'appello Ticino (Court of Appeal Canton Ticino) Switzerland, 29 October 2003 - 12.2002.181, CISG-online No: 912. google scholar
  63. InternationaL CommerciaL Arbitration Court at the ükrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, 23 January 2012 - 218y/2011, CLOüT Case No: 1405. google scholar
  64. U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 06 July 2004 - 1:03-cv-01154, CISG-online No: 925.google scholar
  65. U.S. Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, 07 July 2004-03 C 1154, CLOUT Case No: 696. google scholar