Clause explained · free
Force Majeure Clause Explained in Plain English
"Force majeure" is French for "superior force," and that's basically what the clause is about: events so big and so far outside anyone's control that it wouldn't be fair to hold either side to the contract as usual.
You've probably seen this clause skimmed past a hundred times because it feels like boilerplate. But when something disruptive actually happens — and eventually something always does — this clause decides who eats the cost.
This is one clause — your contract has dozens.
A force majeure clause rarely sits alone. Upload the whole contract and PlainClause reviews every clause in plain English — what you’re signing, the red flags, and what to negotiate. Your first preview is free.
Get your free review →What is a Force Majeure Clause?
A force majeure clause lists the kinds of extreme, unforeseeable events (wars, natural disasters, government lockdowns, pandemics, and similar) that excuse a party from performing the contract, or delay performance, without being in breach. In plain terms: if something huge and uncontrollable happens, this clause says nobody gets sued for not delivering. It exists because contracts assume a normal world, and this is the release valve for when the world stops being normal.
How it typically reads
Most force majeure clauses have two parts: a list of qualifying events (natural disasters, war, terrorism, government action, labor strikes, pandemics, sometimes a catch-all like "or other events beyond the party's reasonable control") and a description of what happens if one occurs — usually that the affected party's obligations are suspended, and if the event drags on long enough, either side can terminate.
Some clauses require the affected party to notify the other side within a set number of days and to keep trying to minimize the disruption. Others say almost nothing about process at all, which sounds harmless but actually leaves a lot of room for dispute later.
Who it tends to favour
On paper, force majeure looks neutral — it protects whoever gets hit by the disruptive event. In practice, it tends to favour whichever party drafted the contract, because they choose what counts as a qualifying event and how broadly or narrowly it's defined.
A company that regularly outsources work, for instance, might write the clause so their own supply chain issues count as force majeure, but a freelancer's illness or a small vendor's cash-flow problem doesn't. The clause can also favour the bigger party simply because they have more legal firepower to argue an event qualifies — or doesn't — when money's on the line.
How it plays out in practice
Disputes over this clause almost never happen over classic examples like earthquakes or wars — those are obvious. They happen over edge cases: was a pandemic-related slowdown really "beyond reasonable control," or could the party have adapted? Did a labor shortage count, or was it just ordinary business risk that should have been priced in?
This is where the exact wording matters enormously. A narrow clause ("acts of God, war, and government-ordered shutdowns only") gives you almost no protection from anything short of catastrophe. A broad clause ("any event beyond the party's reasonable control") is more flexible but also more likely to be argued over, because "reasonable control" is subjective.
How it's sometimes negotiated
Smaller parties can push to have specific risks they care about explicitly named — supply chain disruption, illness, internet or power outages, depending on the nature of the work — rather than relying on a vague catch-all that the other side will interpret narrowly against you.
It's also common to negotiate the consequences: instead of the contract just terminating after a force majeure event drags on, some clauses build in a cooling-off period, a right to renegotiate terms, or a pro-rated payment for work already done before the disruption hit.
When this clause works against you
The clause only protects one party, or is written so only one side's risks are listed
If a client's disruptions count as force majeure but yours don't (or vice versa), the clause isn't a shared safety net — it's a one-way exit ramp for whoever wrote it.
Force majeure lets the other party terminate immediately with no notice or cure period
You could lose the contract (and get cut off from payment for work in progress) the moment they decide, unilaterally, that a qualifying event occurred — with no chance to discuss or adjust.
The list of events is vague or open-ended ("any other event beyond a party's control") with no examples
Vague language gets stretched to cover ordinary business problems — a missed deadline, a difficult client, a slow month — that shouldn't really qualify as force majeure at all.
No obligation to notify the other party or show they tried to keep performing
Without a notice or mitigation requirement, someone could invoke force majeure well after the fact, or use it as a convenient excuse for a delay that had nothing to do with the actual event.
Payment obligations are suspended too, not just delivery obligations
You could end up with work delayed or canceled and no partial payment for what you already completed, even though the disruption wasn't your fault.
The clause doesn't say what happens if the disruption lasts a long time
Without a defined cutoff (e.g., a right to terminate after a set number of weeks), you could be stuck in limbo indefinitely, unable to plan or move on to other work.
"Economic hardship" or "change in market conditions" is excluded by name
This closes off the most common real-world reason people want to invoke the clause — meaning it may only ever apply to genuinely rare catastrophic events, offering less protection than it appears to.
What to check when you see this clause
- Does the clause protect both parties equally, or only one side's risks?
- Is the list of qualifying events specific, or an open-ended catch-all that could be argued either way?
- Does it require written notice within a set timeframe before someone can invoke it?
- Does it require the affected party to try to mitigate or find workarounds before pausing performance?
- What happens to payment for work already done if the clause is triggered?
- Is there a maximum duration after which either party can terminate, or does it drag on indefinitely?
- Are the risks specific to your kind of work (illness, internet outages, supply issues) actually named?
- Is "pandemic" or "epidemic" explicitly included or explicitly excluded?
- Does invoking the clause require proof, or just a good-faith notice from one party?
Seeing a force majeure clause in a contract you’re about to sign? PlainClause reviews the whole document in about a minute.
Review your contract free →Frequently asked questions
What is a force majeure clause in simple terms?
It's the part of a contract that says neither side has to perform as promised if something huge and unforeseeable — like a natural disaster or war — makes it impossible or unreasonable to do so. It's a built-in excuse for extraordinary circumstances, not for ordinary bad luck.
Does force majeure cover a pandemic?
Only if the clause specifically says so, or uses broad enough language to plausibly include it. Many older contracts never mention pandemics at all, which is why so many businesses discovered in 2020 that their force majeure clauses didn't help them.
Can I use force majeure just because a job got harder or more expensive?
Generally no. Force majeure is meant for events beyond anyone's control that make performance genuinely impossible or illegal, not situations that are simply inconvenient, costlier, or less profitable than expected.
What happens if a force majeure event goes on for months?
That depends entirely on what the clause says. Well-drafted clauses include a maximum duration after which either party can terminate the contract; poorly drafted ones leave this open-ended, which can trap both sides in uncertainty.
Is a force majeure clause the same as a limitation of liability clause?
No. Force majeure excuses non-performance due to extraordinary outside events. Limitation of liability caps how much money one party can be forced to pay if something goes wrong. They can interact, but they do very different jobs in a contract.
Key takeaways
- A force majeure clause excuses non-performance when extraordinary, uncontrollable events make it impossible — not just inconvenient — to fulfill the contract.
- The exact list of qualifying events matters enormously; vague or one-sided lists tend to favor whoever drafted the contract.
- Watch for clauses that suspend payment along with performance, or that let the other party terminate instantly with no notice.
- A clause with no maximum duration can leave you stuck in limbo indefinitely if a disruption drags on.
- If a specific risk matters to your work (illness, outages, supply issues), it's worth checking whether it's actually named — not just implied.
More guides
This guide is general information to help you understand a common type of contract — it is not legal adviceand doesn’t cover your specific situation or local laws. For a high-stakes contract, consult a lawyer.