The Legal Implications of Applying the Theory of Force Majeure between Iraqi Law and the Vienna Convention.

Abstract

The theory of force majeure refers to an unusual or abnormal general state or a general material incident that was not anticipated by the contracting parties at the time of the contract. It causes a severe imbalance in the economic equilibrium that existed upon the contract's conclusion, making the debtor's fulfillment of their obligation threaten a significant and uncommon loss in transactions. Consequently, the debtor is not compelled to execute the obligation as stated in the contract but is instead relieved to a degree dictated by justice^).([1]
The will of the parties alone determines the conditions of the contract, the obligations of the parties, and the resulting effects. However, this will may encounter unforeseen obstacles at the time of contracting, represented by unforeseen circumstances before execution, which lead to the debtor's significant distress or loss. In such cases, the judge may amend the contract by reducing the debtor's obligations, increasing the creditor's obligations, or suspending the contract's execution for a specified period if there is a likelihood of the temporary circumstance's cessation, such as a sharp rise in prices due to halted imports for a limited time. Naturally, applying this theory entails consequences that we will elaborate on in this study. Initially, we can state that if the conditions of the force majeure theory are met, it results in two main effects: