La tentation est grande de proclamer qu’aujourd’hui toute imprévisibilité a disparu. Dès lors qu’un fait s’est produit, il semble rétrospectivement acquis qu’il était prévisible avant même sa réalisation. Puisque l’on doit s’attendre à tout, rien ne peut être considéré comme imprévisible ; ni une crise économique, ni une catastrophe naturelle, ni un simple accident, dont on sait qu’ils peuvent survenir à n’importe quel moment, frapper n’importe où et n’importe qui. L’imprévisibilité, privée de consistance et d’effets, se voit alors inexorablement écartée du domaine du droit.Pourtant, l’imprévisibilité demeure une réalité, dès lors que l’on est incapable de prévoir le moment, le lieu, l’intensité ou la victime du fait. Admettre l’existence de l’imprévisibilité sans renoncer à l’encadrer, voilà le défi qui est lancé au droit. Les moyens d’y répondre sont nombreux mais épars, et leur application souffre souvent d’une mauvaise identification de la notion. L’ambition de cette étude est de démontrer que l’imprévisibilité du fait innerve l’ensemble du droit privé contemporain, et de dessiner les contours de l’attitude de ce dernier à son égard. Une réception ordonnée et délimitée d’une imprévisibilité irréductible n’est à ce titre pas incompatible avec une attitude plus active du droit pour canaliser cette imprévisibilité. Identifier ses effets de droit, construire une définition, démontrer les ressorts et les possibilités de l’anticiper ou de la maintenir, tels sont les éléments indispensables à apporter à la réflexion juridique pour que le droit puisse faire face le plus sereinement possible à l’imprévisibilité d’un fait. / Nowadays, one could be tempted to state that the concept of unpredictability has disappeared. Indeed, if some event actually occurs, it is likely to be deemed predictable retrospectively, even before its taking place. As any event can occur, no event can be deemed unpredictable any longer : neither an economic crisis, nor natural disaster, nor the most banal accident. It is common knowledge that such events may occur at any time, strike anybody, anywhere. In this way, unpredictability is deprived of its legal purpose and effects and discarded by law. However, unpredictability remains a reality, when one is unable to foresee the moment, the place, the intensity or the victim caused by the event. The challenge laid down by law shall consist in recognizing the existence of unpredictability in order for law to be able to frame this concept. There are many ways to reach this goal, and the solutions and their implementation remain dispersed owing to the difficulty to clearly identifying the concept of unpredictability. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that the notion of unpredictability invigorates the whole scope of contemporary private law, and to show how this concept shall be apprehended by law. A defined and specific implementation of the irreductible aspects of the concept of unpredictability by law will not be incompatible with a more active approach, in order for unpredictability to be captured by law. Identifying legal effects, creating a definition, demonstrating the means and the abilities to anticipate unpredictability or to maintain it, will remain essential steps in the legal constructing, so that law shall be able to face unpredictability serenely.

Le contentieux contractuel éclate lorsque l'une des parties n'exécute plus ou pas ses obligations. La préoccupation essentielle en matière contractuelle, consiste à lutter contre une rupture abusive et arbitraire du contrat. La particularité du droit civil français en matière de rupture du contrat, est la place très importante qu'occupe le juge judiciaire. L'assurance de la protection des intérêts des parties et la garantie d'une sanction juste et équitable, reposent en effet, sur les épaules du juge. Il est par conséquent inconcevable que le juge soit écarté du jeu de la rupture contractuelle. L'orientation traditionnelle a toujours fait du juge un pilier dans le domaine de la séparation contractuelle, mais cette tendance commence quelque peu à se dissiper. Le juge doit toujours jouer un rôle très important en droit des contrats en général et dans sa rupture en particulier. Une protection efficace des parties donnerait à l'intervention du juge une utilité plus importante. Il est primordial, que le juge soit un acteur, en matière de rupture contractuelle, dont le rôle serait la garantie du respect des lois et la protection complète des parties ; le cas contraire, pourrait réduire alors la portée du code civil actuel à un simple catalogue de lois régissant l'anéantissement du contrat. / Contractual litigation arises when one of the parties fails to fulfill its obligations. Its main concern is to fight against abusive and arbitrary breach of contracts. In the French civil law, the judge occupies a very important place when debating breach of contracts. It is impossible to alienate the judge when it comes down to contract breaches. In fact, he insures that the interests of every concerned party are protected. He also guarantees that fair and equitable sanctions will be applied. Traditionally, the judge was very important when discussing breach of contracts. However, this trend is beginning to dissipate. In general, the judge plays a very important role in contract law, but his role is primordial when disputing contract termination. Effective protection of the parties would give the intervention of the judge a greater utility. It is essential that the judge remains an important actor when it comes to breach of contract as his role is to guarantee that the law is respected and that every party is adequately protected. On the contrary, it could reduce the importance of the current Civil Code to a mere catalog of laws governing the annulment contracts

Avtalsrätten vilar på principen att avtal skall hållas. Den som vägrar att uppfylla sitt avtalslöfte kan tvingas att fullgöra sina skyldigheter och betala skadestånd genom tvångsåtgärder av myndighet. Men precis som för principer i allmänhet, så har även denna princip ett flertal undantag. En teoretisk motivering för att befrias från en avtalsförpliktelse är den tyska Omöjlighetsläran som växt fram på grundval av den romerska rättsgrundsatsen - impossibilum nulla obligatio est. Denna lära förespråkar attvid förekomst av objektiv ursprunglig omöjlighet, dvs. avtalsprestationen har ända sedan avtalsingåendet varit omöjligt att fullgöra för alla och envar i gäldenärens ställning, skall avtalet anses som ogiltigt. Detta medför även att gäldenären befrias från skyldigheten att fullgöra avtalsprestationen ifråga, och vid en eventuell kännedom om omöjligheten, endast behöver ersätta motpartens negativa kontraltsintresse. Omöjlighetsläran sägs ha legat till grund för dröjsmålsreglerna i 1905 års köplag. Vid en analysering av dessa regler framkommer däremot att det snarare rör sig om en sammanblandning av Omöjlighetsläran och den till viss del snarlika läran om Force majeure. Omöjlighetslärans betydelse inom svensk rätt kom sedan att förändras dramatiskt i och med införandet av den nya köplagen 1990. Läran kritiserades som alltför sträng med sitt krav på absolut och objektiv omöjlighet. Denna uppsats försöker emellertid avslutningsvis påvisa att det fortfarande finns ett behov och användningsområde för Omöjlighetsläran i framtida svensk rätt i form av en oskriven kontraktsrättslig princip.

<p>Avtalsrätten vilar på principen att avtal skall hållas. Den som vägrar att uppfylla sitt avtalslöfte kan tvingas att fullgöra sina skyldigheter och betala skadestånd genom tvångsåtgärder av myndighet. Men precis som för principer i allmänhet, så har även denna princip ett flertal undantag. En teoretisk motivering för att befrias från en avtalsförpliktelse är den tyska Omöjlighetsläran som växt fram på grundval av den romerska rättsgrundsatsen - impossibilum nulla obligatio est. Denna lära förespråkar attvid förekomst av objektiv ursprunglig omöjlighet, dvs. avtalsprestationen har ända sedan avtalsingåendet varit omöjligt att fullgöra för alla och envar i gäldenärens ställning, skall avtalet anses som ogiltigt. Detta medför även att gäldenären befrias från skyldigheten att fullgöra avtalsprestationen ifråga, och vid en eventuell kännedom om omöjligheten, endast behöver ersätta motpartens negativa kontraltsintresse. Omöjlighetsläran sägs ha legat till grund för dröjsmålsreglerna i 1905 års köplag. Vid en analysering av dessa regler framkommer däremot att det snarare rör sig om en sammanblandning av Omöjlighetsläran och den till viss del snarlika läran om Force majeure. Omöjlighetslärans betydelse inom svensk rätt kom sedan att förändras dramatiskt i och med införandet av den nya köplagen 1990. Läran kritiserades som alltför sträng med sitt krav på absolut och objektiv omöjlighet. Denna uppsats försöker emellertid avslutningsvis påvisa att det fortfarande finns ett behov och användningsområde för Omöjlighetsläran i framtida svensk rätt i form av en oskriven kontraktsrättslig princip.</p>

Force majeure excludes civil liability and is accepted as a universal defense in accordance with the principle that nobody is bound to perform what is impossible. In the civil law systems force majeure is a concept provided for by statutory law, leaving its application to the courts in a case by case approach. In the common law system, the contract is terminated and the non-performing party is exempted from paying damages if there is an emerging event which frustrates the purpose of the contract or renders the same as commercially impracticable. The force majeure defense can be invoked only if there is an express contractual provision where the parties define which events are deemed as force majeure and agree upon its legal effects. This paper examines the interaction between the two systems, which happens most significantly in the international business transactions. / La fuerza mayor es una eximente de responsabilidad de aceptación universal, en desarrollo del principio según el cual nadie está obligado a lo imposible. En los sistemas de derecho continental este concepto se ha consagrado generalmente a través de una enunciación legal que puede ser más o menos amplia, dejando a los jueces su valoración caso por caso. En el common law, el contrato termina y la parte incumplida se exonera de la obligación de pagar perjuicios cuando surge una circunstancia que frustra la finalidad perseguida por los contratantes o si la prestación es «comercialmente impracticable». La aplicación de la eximente «fuerza mayor» en este sistema proviene de cláusulas expresas en que las partes la consagran y regulan sus efectos jurídicos. En el presente escrito se examina la interacción de los dos sistemas, la cual ocurre de manera muy significativa en la contratación internacional.

This mini-dissertation analyses whether COVID-19 can be regarded as a force majeure event in international sales contracts in Africa. It begins by looking at the history and development of force majeure (or more generally, the doctrine of excuse for non-performance) in both civil and common law legal systems. It then moves on to look at whether in terms of the provisions of the CISG, the COVID-19 pandemic can serve as an excuse for non-performance in international sales contracts governed by the CISG. Next, the domestic law of South Africa is considered, and it is analysed whether the COVID-19 pandemic can be an excuse for non-performance in international sales contracts that is governed by South African law. The mini-dissertation concludes by discussing how force majeure clauses can and should be used in international sales contracts during the COVID-19 pandemic. / Mini Dissertation (LLM (International Trade and Investment Law in Africa))--University of Pretoria, 2021. / Centre for Human Rights / LLM (International Trade and Investment Law in Africa) / Unrestricted

The construction industry has faced major challenges in recent years. A number of different circumstances have had a great impact on the global economy, one of the largest being Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine, but also the Covid-19 pandemic, the impending energy crisis and the increasing inflation. The effects of these events have had an impact on delayed deliveries as well as labor and materials in construction projects. In a fixed-price contract, it is usually the contractor who bears the risk for cost changes. The regulation in 6:3 AB 04 and ABT 06 exists to balance unforeseeable cost changes, in that unpredictable cost changes can lead to the fixed price being adjusted. The purpose of the regulation is to make it possible for the employer to obtain tenders that are comparable. Otherwise, the contractor’s risk calculation would partly be based on arbitrariness. The purpose of this thesis is to analyze in which situations a party can request a price adjustment in accordance with 6:3 AB 04 and ABT 06 and shed light on other possible regulations regarding cost changes by examining the corresponding Norwegian and Danish standard contracts. Furthermore, the thesis examines how the parties in commercial constructions negotiate contracts when they are not satisfied with the solution prescribed in the standard agreements, i.e. how the parties can adjust the risks with an index. This is done by applying legal dogmatic method in combination with comparative method. The thesis also contains elements from sociology of law, regarding how the industry has adapted today’s challenges in index clauses in construction agreements.  This thesis explains in greater detail the different components of 6:3 AB 04 and ABT 06 in order to clarify in which situations the regulation can be applied. The conclusion is that 6:3 consists of a number of unclear components, which require a legal assessment that determines whether the regulation can be applied. However, certain components have been able to be clarified, such as the relationship between the relevant circumstance and foreseeability, which point in time that is decisive for the foreseeability assessment and how several different cost changes can affect the materiality. An index might be useful while examining 6:3 since an index can be used as an aid in determining abnormal price changes and in the materiality assessment.  The thesis compares the Swedish regulation with the Norwegian and Danish regulations, which leads to the conclusion that there is no Nordic cooperation regarding price adjustment due to cost changes. The Norwegian standard contracts are based on an indexation regulation, otherwise there is no possibility for a party to request a price adjustment, except regarding government fees. Similar to the Norwegian regulation, the Danish standard contracts are also based on an indexation regulation, which regulates the price from one year after the tender. The Danish standard contracts also contain a provision that can provide price adjustment as a result of cost increases for materials and fuel if the increases reach certain percentages. While the Danish regulation contains more concrete components, the Swedish regulation is more flexible and includes several different types of cost changes.  Finally, an increased interest has been noted regarding index clauses in Swedish constructions. The thesis discusses the impact of the choice of index regulation. Whether the index handles current cost changes in such a way that the contractor receives full coverage for his expenses, depends to a large extent on which index is chosen and how the index clause is formulated.

This article addresses the theme referred to the remedies of the suspension of work by reason of fortuitous event or force majeure. Through an analysis of the current legislation in the subject and administrative precedents, the author examines how this regulation is applied, and how this mechanism allows or not the labour continuity. By recognizing labour continuity as the foundation of the suspension of work by reason of fortuitous event and force majeure, the author concludes in the need for legal mechanisms to enable the employment relationship flexibilization. / El presente artículo aborda la temática referida a la suspensión de labores por caso fortuito o fuerza mayor. Realizando un análisis sobre la legislación vigente en la materia y precedentes administrativos, el autor examina cómo es que la regulación se aplica, y cómo este mecanismo permite o no la continuidad laboral. Reconociendo la continuidad laboral como fundamento de la suspensión por caso fortuito y fuerza mayor, el autor concluye en la necesidad de mecanismos legales que permitan la flexibilización de la relación laboral.

Sammanfattning I Europa samt i vår övriga omvärld har hotet från terrorister under de senaste åren ökat. Därför är det av betydelse att försäkringsskydd finns att tillgå när eller om vi drabbas av terroristers våldshandlingar, för att åtminstone mildra vårt ekonomiska lidande. I denna masteruppsats får läsaren bland annat bekanta sig med vilka försäkringsmöjligheter som de större försäkringsgivarna har att erbjuda privatpersoner samt företag, avseende skada som har orsakats av terrorism. I uppsatsen behandlas försäkringar där skydd mot terrorism undantas helt eller till vissa delar. Detta gör det betydelsefullt att analysera i vilken utsträckning försäkringsbolag har rätt att undanta terrorrisker samt vilket rörelseutrymme försäkringsbolag har beträffande att inte uppställa undantag för nämnda risker. Vidare framförs resonemang om hur samhället påverkas av att försäkringsskydd, i vissa fall, saknas på området samt hur rimligt det är att försäkringsbranschen saknar en gemensam definition av terrorism. Terrorism kan ibland klassificeras som krigsliknande händelse. I uppsatsen behandlas därför också frågor om hur klassificeringen teoretiskt sett kan komma att påverka försäkringsersättningen vid ett eventuellt terrorscenario.

Les avocats, praticiens et universitaires qui sont engagés dans le droit des transports internationaux de marchandises par mer ont l’habitude de travailler avec un régime complexe de responsabilité du transporteur maritime. La coexistence de plusieurs conventions régissant ce régime et l’imprécision des textes de ces différentes législations rendent leur application difficile d’où l’échec permanent du voeu d’uniformisation de ce droit. En premier lieu, nous retrouvons le régime de base celui de la Convention de Bruxelles sur l’unification de certaines règles en matière de connaissement, ratifiée le 25 août 1924 et ses Protocoles modificatifs annexés en 1968 et 1979. Il s’agit d’un régime fondé sur la présomption de responsabilité comprenant une liste de cas exonératoires appelés « cas exceptés ». En second lieu figurent les Règles de Hambourg, édictées en 1978, qui établissent un régime basé sur la présomption de faute du transporteur à l’exception de deux cas exonératoires : l’incendie et l’assistance ou la tentative de sauvetage. Enfin, apparaît la Convention sur le contrat de transport international de marchandises effectué entièrement ou partiellement par mer, adoptée par les Nations unies en 2009, sous l’appellation « Les Règles de Rotterdam », qui adopte un régime de responsabilité « particulier ». Cette étude a tenté d’analyser ces mécanismes juridiques mis en place. Pour ce faire, nous nous sommes concentrées sur les sources du dysfonctionnement de ces régimes, afin de favoriser le développement d’initiatives d’uniformisation des règles de responsabilité du propriétaire du navire. L’analyse des textes positifs, de la doctrine et de la jurisprudence, nous a permis de constater que les différentes approches du régime juridique du transporteur maritime des marchandises sous ces différentes législations ne garantissent pas la prévisibilité et la sécurité juridiques recherchées par les différents acteurs maritimes. Par conséquent, l’absence d’un régime cohérent et unifié a créé des incertitudes au sein de la communauté maritime internationale et au sein des tribunaux en cas de litige. Pour surmonter cette réalité complexe, notre thèse propose une approche qui pourra simplifier ce régime, l’approche objective. / Lawyers, academics and practitioners who are involved in law of carriage of goods by sea are used to working with a complex regime of carrier’s liability. The coexistence of multiple international conventions governing the regime of liability of the maritime carrier and their different and inconsistent legislative styles, have become the main reason for lack of uniformity in the field of the carriage of goods by sea. The Brussels Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to Bill of Lading signed in August 25, 1924 and its Protocols amending 1968 and 1979 are based on presumption liability regime with a list of "excepted cases". A second Convention known as the Hamburg Rules of 1978 established a regime based on the presumption of fault of the carrier with two exceptions: fire and assistance or salvage. Finally, in 2009 the United Nations adopted the Convention on Contract for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea based on a ''special'' regime. This study of the three conventions attempts to analyze their legal mechanisms and the sources of their dysfunction. By analyzing the positive texts, jurisprudence, opinions and thoughts of scholars on this matter, we found that the different legal approaches adopted under these various laws do not ensure predictability and legal certainty sought out by maritime actors and courts. To overcome this complex reality, this thesis proposes an approach that will simplify the applicability of the rules of carrier’s liability, which is the objective approach.