LAST WEEK, Senator Robinhood Padilla made headlines after invoking the concept of force majeure in discussions involving proposed amendments to Senate rules that would allow senators to participate and vote through videoconferencing during extraordinary circumstances.
The legal phrase instantly became a buzzword in both formal or informal discussions. While it is commonly seen in contracts, the concept of force majeure extends far beyond contractual obligations and may be applied in many legal, governmental, commercial, and even day-to-day situations where extraordinary events disrupt the normal course of human activity.
Interestingly, a lot of Filipinos first heard about this phrase during the COVID-19 pandemic when businesses, schools, and flights were disrupted and affected by lockdowns. It was only after Sen. Padilla mentioned this term that it was brought again in the national conversation and consciousness. Frankly speaking, a very few actually understand what force majeure legally means.
Let us begin with the term itself.
Force majeure is French. Literally translated, it means “superior force” or “greater force.”
Its roots come from civil law systems influenced by Roman law, and the concept eventually became embedded in many legal systems around the world, including Philippine law.
In ordinary language, force majeure refers to extraordinary events beyond human control that prevent a person from fulfilling an obligation. Under Philippine law, the concept is closely connected to what the Civil Code calls fortuitous events.
Article 1174 of the Civil Code provides:
“Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or when it is otherwise declared by stipulation, or when the nature of the obligation requires the assumption of risk, no person shall be responsible for those events which could not be foreseen, or which, though foreseen, were inevitable.”
That provision is the fundamental legal foundation of force majeure in the Philippines.
In simpler terms, the law generally excuses a person from liability when an obligation cannot be performed because of extraordinary events beyond human control.
Examples include earthquakes, typhoons, floods, wars, armed conflicts, widespread fires, government prohibitions, pandemics, and other unforeseeable and unavoidable events.
But here is an important clarification many people misunderstand: Not every inconvenience is force majeure.
The law requires specific requisites before force majeure may apply.
First, the event must be independent of human will. Second, the event must be unforeseeable or unavoidable. Third, the event must make performance impossible or extremely difficult. And fourth, the person invoking force majeure must not have contributed to the loss or delay through negligence.
For instance, an airline canceled several flights after a volcanic eruption produced ash clouds that endangered air travel. The cancellation may be justified as force majeure because the event was unavoidable and threatened public safety.
It should also be noted that force majeure is commonly divided into two categories:
- acts of God, which are natural events beyond human control, such as earthquakes, typhoons, floods, volcanic eruptions, lightning, and pandemics.
- acts of man, which are human-caused events that are likewise beyond the control of the parties, such as wars, riots, strikes, terrorism, rebellions, or government lockdowns.
In both cases, the event must be unavoidable and must make the fulfillment of the obligation impossible or extremely difficult.
Be reminded that a person cannot negligently create a problem and later hide behind “force majeure.” Force majeure is not a universal excuse for irresponsibility.
As I said previously, this civil law concept became especially familiar during the COVID-19 pandemic. Businesses closed. Flights were canceled. Construction projects stopped. Court hearings shifted online. Classes became virtual. Many contracts suddenly became impossible to perform under normal circumstances.
During that period, Filipinos repeatedly encountered the phrase: “Due to force majeure…”
In reality, however, the legal effects of force majeure depend on the nature of the obligation, the wording of contracts, and surrounding circumstances.
Some obligations are extinguished. Others are merely suspended. Some contracts contain detailed force majeure clauses specifying what events are covered and what remedies apply.
That is why courts analyze these situations carefully on a case-to-case basis.
With the controversial mention of force majeure, one thing is certain: the issue once again brought an old legal concept into public conversation.
Sometimes, legal concepts quietly shape everyday life — during storms, canceled events, online meetings, delayed deliveries, disrupted businesses, and even Senate sessions.
Remember that in law, the phrase is not merely a dramatic excuse. It is a legal concept with specific requisites, limitations, and consequences under the Civil Code.
And as always, not everything beyond convenience qualifies as a superior force under the law.
Class dismissed!