網上投稿
新型冠狀病毒肺炎疫情（“疫情”）爆發后，筆者在春節假期內連續接到多起法律咨詢，主要內容為：合同義務履行受到疫情影響的情況下，當事人可否援引不可抗力要求免責？
After the outbreak of the New Coronavirus Pneumonia Epidemic(“Epidemic”), we received several legal consultations during the Spring Festival holidays: in the event that the performance of contract is affected by the Epidemic, can the contracting party be relieved of liability in reliance on force majeure?
鑒于該等問題具有一定共性，我們特將法律意見整理為短文一篇，謹供參考。
Given of the generality of the questions, we hereby summarize our legal opnions in this article for reference.
一、 何為“不可抗力”
What is Force Majeure
我國關于 “不可抗力”的法律規定，主要見于《民法總則》、《民法通則》、《合同法》：
Legal provisions for “force majeure” are mainly provided in General Provisions of the Civil?Law, General Principles of Civil Law, and Contract Law:
| 名稱 Name |
法條 No. of Article |
正文 Provisions |
| 民法總則 General Provisions of the Civil?Law |
第一百八十條 Article 180 |
因不可抗力不能履行民事義務的，不承擔民事責任。法律另有規定的，依照其規定。 If a party is unable to perform the civil obligation due to force majeure, the party shall not bear the civil liability. If the law provides otherwise, such provisions shall prevail. 不可抗力是指不能預見、不能避免且不能克服的客觀情況。 “Force majeure” means unforeseeable, unavoidable and insurmountable objective conditions. |
| 民法通則 General Principles of Civil Law |
第一百零七條 Article 107 |
因不可抗力不能履行合同或者造成他人損害的，不承擔民事責任，法律另有規定的除外。 Civil liability shall not be borne for failure to perform a contract or damage to a third party if it is caused by force majeure, except as otherwise provided by law. |
| 第一百五十三條 Article 153 |
本法所稱的 “不可抗力”，是指不能預見、不能避免并不能克服的客觀情況。 For the purpose of this Law, “force majeure” means unforeseeable, unavoidable and insurmountable objective conditions. |
|
| 合同法 Contract Law |
第九十四條 Article 94 |
有下列情形之一的，當事人可以解除合同：（一）因不可抗力致使不能實現合同目的； The parties may dissolve the contract under any of the following circumstances: (1) the aim of the contract cannot be attained because of force majeure; |
| 第一百一十七條 Article 117 |
因不可抗力不能履行合同的，根據不可抗力的影響，部分或者全部免除責任，但法律另有規定的除外。當事人遲延履行后發生不可抗力的，不能免除責任。 本法所稱不可抗力，是指不能預見、不能避免并不能克服的客觀情況。 If a contract cannot be fulfilled due to force majeure, the obligations may be exempted in whole or in part depending on the impact of the force majeure, unless laws provide otherwise. If the force majeure occurs after a delayed fulfillment, the obligations of the party concerned may not be exempted. Force majeure as used herein means objective situations which cannot be foreseen, avoided or overcome. |
|
| 第一百一十八條 Article 118 |
當事人一方因不可抗力不能履行合同的，應當及時通知對方，以減輕可能給對方造成的損失，并應當在合理期限內提供證明。 Either party that is unable to fulfill the contract due to force majeure shall notify the other party in time in order to reduce losses possibly inflicted to the other party, and shall provide evidence thereof within a reasonable period of time. |
歸納可知：
To conclude:
1. 從不可抗力的構成要件來看，應同時滿足：① 主觀上不能預見；② 客觀上不能避免、不能克服；
From the perspective of constitutive elements, a force majeure event shall be ①unforeseeable subjectively, and ② unavoidable and insurmountable objectively;
2. 從不可抗力的發生時間來看，應在當事人出現遲延履行的情形之前；
From the perspective occurring time, a force majeure event shall happen before late performance of contract by the affected party;
3. 從不可抗力的法律效力來看，屬法定免責事由，不能約定排除，即使合同無約定仍可依法主張；
From the perspective of legal effect, force majeure is statutory circumstance under which liabilities can be exempted and such exemption cannot be excluded by agreement. A party affected by force majeure can be relieved of liabilities incurred thereby even if the contract is silent on this;
4. 從不可抗力的法律后果來看，根據受不可抗力影響的程度不同，受影響方既可能全部免責，也可能僅部分免責，法律另有規定的除外[1]。
From the perspective of legal consequence, the party affected by the force majeure can be relieved of all or part of the liabilities depending on the influence of the force majeure, unless the law provides otherwise.[1]
二、 本次疫情是否構成不可抗力
Is This Epidemic Outbreak a Force Majeure?
筆者認為：本次疫情在個案中是否構成不可抗力，需結合個案情況，逐一分析其是否具備不可抗力的主客觀構成要件，不能一概而論。而“非典”相關判例及《最高人民法院關于在防治傳染性非典型肺炎期間依法做好人民法院相關審判、執行工作的通知》[2]（已廢止）可作參考。
We maintain that it shall be decided on a case-by-case basis whether the Epidemic is a force majerure, after taking into consideration each specific case and analyzing both the subjective and objective elements of force majeure. The judicial precedents relating to SARS and Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Doing Good Job of Trial and Enforcement by the People’s Court During SARS[2] (Repealed) can be used as reference.
根據相關法律規定及“非典”相關判例體現的裁判精神，筆者歸納本次疫情是否構成不可抗力的判斷標準如下：
In accordance with the applicable laws and regulations, and the spirit in the judicial precedents relating to SARS, we conclude the following criteria when deciding if the the Epidemic is a force majeure:
| 構成要件 Constitutive Elements |
判斷依據 Basis |
結論 Conclusion |
| 主觀要件：不可預見 Subjective Element: unforeseeable |
本次疫情屬于突發公共衛生事件，在本次疫情發生前，依善意一般人（即一般公眾）的預見能力，無法預見其發生及可能造成的合同履行困難。因此，本次疫情具備不可抗力所要求的不可預見性。 The Epidemic is a public health emergency. Before the Epidemic, it was impossible for a bona fide third party (i.e. general publics) to foresee its occurrence and the potential difficulties that it caused to contract performance. Therefore, the Epidemic has met the requirement of unforeseeability as required by force majeure. |
要件滿足 The Epidmic is unforeseeable |
| 客觀要件： 不能避免、不能克服 Objective Element: unavoidable and insurmountable |
1、本次疫情為全國性特別重大突發公共衛生事件[3]，其發生和擴散不以一方當事人的意志為轉移，無論個案中當事人自身是否已盡合理注意，均不能避免疫情出現。 The Epidemic is a nationwide major public health emergency3. Its occurrence and spread will not be impacted by the will of any party. Regardless of reasonable care taken by a party in any specific case, the Epidemic is unavoidable. 2、在此基礎上，該疫情是否在個案中對合同履行產生不能避免、不能克服的影響，還應結合：①合同具體內容、履行方式、履行期限，及②所在地域的政府行為（包括但不限于當地政府部門為防控疫情，而采取的延長假期、封鎖交通、限制人口流動、取消大型活動、要求相關企業暫停或限制其主要經營活動等措施），及③當事人的具體情況（例如在具有較強人身依附性和不可替代性的合同中，當事人是否因疫情被隔離或住院而不能如期履行合同義務等）等因素，從而進一步考量：疫情是否與合同不能履行或延期履行具有直接因果關系？如有充分證據證明存在直接因果關系，則不可抗力應為成立。 On this basis, the following factors shall also be taken into consideration when deciding whether the Epidemic has an unavoidable and insurmountable effect on the performance of the contract in individual cases: ① the specific content of the contract, the method of performance, the period of performance, and ②the government’s actions in the region (including but not limited to the extension of holidays, traffic blockades, restrictions on population movements, ban of large-scale activities, suspension or restriction of main business activities of the enterprises, etc.) for the purpose of preventing and controlling the Epidemic, and ③ the specific conditions of the parties (for example, in case the performance of a contract highly depends on the contracting party and the contracting party is irreplaceable, is the contracting party unable to perform the contract as it is quarantined or hospitalized due to the Epidemic). Then it shall be further considered if the Epidemic has a direct causal relationship with the non-performance or late performance of the contract. If there is sufficient evidence that there is direct causal relationship, then there is a force majeure. |
具體分析 It shall be analyzed case by case |
需進一步說明的是：
It shall be further illustrated that:
1. 不宜認定不可抗力的情形：
Circumstances that should not be deemed as force majeure:
a. 本次疫情的出現，未對個案中合同義務的履行造成實質影響及合同目的落空；
The occurrence of the Epidemic has not materially affected the performance of the contractual obligations and the purpose of the contract is not frustrated;
b. 合同訂立于疫情發生之后，或合同在疫情發生之前已處于遲延履行狀態。
The contract is concluded after the Epidemic, or the performance of the contract has been delayed before the Epidemic.
2. 認定不可抗力≠全部免責
Force majeure ≠ Exemptions of all liabilities
即便本次疫情在個案中構成不可抗力，其法律后果也非部分當事人理解的“只要構成不可抗力，就一概解除合同、全部免責”。
Even if the Epidemic constitutes force majeure in a specific case, the legal consequence is not what understood by some parties - “As long as there is a force majeure, all the contracts will be terminated and all liabilities will be relieved.”
實際上，根據相關法律規定及裁判案例，不可抗力可能產生的法律后果包括：合同的變更或解除，延期履行、部分履行與全部不履行。不同的法律后果，主要取決于不可抗力對個案合同履行所產生的不同影響程度，包括：合同全部不能履行、合同部分不能履行或合同遲延履行。
In fact, according to the relevant legal regulations and judicial precedents, the possible legal consequences of force majeure include modification or termination of the contract, postponement of performance, and partial or failure of performance. The legal consequences mainly depend on the different degrees of influence on performance of the contracts by force majeure, including the non-performance of the entire contract, partial non-performance of the contract, or delayed performance of the contract.
因此，當事人基于不可抗力成立而提出的要求，應當與其履行合同所受影響程度相符。例如，某當事人因疫情影響而部分不能履行合同，但要求解除合同及全部免責的，則法院將有較大可能基于促成交易、降低交易成本及誠實信用原則等考慮不予支持該等要求。
Therefore, the request made by the contracting party shall be consistent with the degree of influence on the performance of contract. For example, if a contracting party is unable to perform part of the contract due to the Epidemic, but requires that the entire contract be terminated and all liabilities be exempted, it is very likely that the court will not uphold such requirements based on considerations such as facilitating transactions, reducing transaction costs, and the principles of good faith.
3. 債務人應注意的各項義務
Obligations that the debtor should pay attention to
a. 及時通知及舉證義務
Obligation of timely notification and burden of proof
根據《合同法》第一百一十八條之規定，及時通知及舉證義務是援引不可抗力的債務人必須履行之法定義務。結合“非典”相關判例，法院可采信的證據包括但不限于政府命令、住院證明、診斷病例、出院小結、隔離證明等。
According to Article 118 of the Contract Law, it is the statutory obligation of the debtor who intends to rely on force majeure to fulfill the obligation of timely notification and burden of proof. With reference to the relevant precedents of SARS, the evidence admissible by the court includes, but is not limited to, government orders, hospitalization certificates, diagnosed cases, discharge summary, and quarantine certificates.
b. 避免損失擴大義務
Obligation to avoid expansion of loss
基于誠實信用原則，不可抗力事件發生時，債務人負有采取積極措施盡量減少或避免損失擴大的義務。如債務人怠于履行該等義務而致損失擴大，則債務人亦應根據其過錯程度承擔相應責任。
Based on the principle of good faith, when a force majeure event occurs, the debtor is obliged to take active measures to minimize or avoid the expansion of losses. If the debtor’s failure to perform aforesaid obligations results in an increase of losses, the debtor should also bear corresponding liabilities based on the extent of its fault.
三、 延伸思考：情勢變更的選擇適用
Other Thoughts: Application of Change of Circumstances
在此前關于“非典”的相關判例及法官關于免責制度的學術觀點中，亦有部分意見采納或傾向于適用《最高人民法院關于適用<中華人民共和國合同法>若干問題的解釋(二)》第二十六條之規定（即“情勢變更”），而非“不可抗力”[4]。
In the previous relevant precedents relating to SARS and the academic opinions of judges on the exemption of liabilities, some people adopted or tended to apply Article 26 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning Application of the “Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China” (2) (i.e. change of circumstances) instead of force majeure[4].
《最高人民法院關于適用<中華人民共和國合同法>若干問題的解釋(二)》
第二十六條 合同成立以后客觀情況發生了當事人在訂立合同時無法預見的、非不可抗力造成的不屬于商業風險的重大變化，繼續履行合同對于一方當事人明顯不公平或者不能實現合同目的，當事人請求人民法院變更或者解除合同的，人民法院應當根據公平原則，并結合案件的實際情況確定是否變更或者解除。
Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning Application of the “Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China” (2)
Article 26 Where any significant change in the objective environment has taken place after the formation of a contract which could not have been foreseen by the relevant parties at the time of entering into the contract, and does not belong to any commercial risk occasioned by any force majeure cause, rendering the continual performance of the contract manifestly unfair to the relevant party or rendering it impossible to realize the goal of the contract, the People’s Court shall confirm whether the contract shall be varied or dissolved in accordance with the principle of justice taking into account the actual circumstance, where a relevant party petitions a People’s Court to vary or dissolve the contract.
針對本次疫情的影響，法律工作者在結合個案擬定免責方案和應對策略時，特別是在個案中證據不足以證明疫情對于合同的履行產生了“不可克服”的影響之時，或可將情勢變更作為一條“備選思路”。因為情勢變更也屬于不可預見、不能避免的情形，但在僅導致合同的履行艱難或不必要，即按照合同履行是可能的，只是會造成雙方利益關系的嚴重失衡、對于一方當事人明顯不公平之時，亦可考慮適用。
In terms of the impact of this Epidemic, legal workers may use change of circumstances as an alternative when making liability exemption plan and response strategy based on specific cases, especially when there is no evidence to prove that the Epidemic has “insurmountable” impact on the performance of the contract. As change of circumstances is also an unforeseeable and unavoidable situation, it can be applicable where it only causes the performance of contract to be difficult or unnecessary; in other words, it is possible to perform the contract, but such performance will cause a serious imbalance between the interests of the two parties and is obviously unfair to one party.
最后，限于篇幅，本文在此簡要摘錄不可抗力與情勢變更區別，希望對讀者針對個案進行不可抗力與情勢變更的選擇適用有所幫助[5]：
Due to space limitations, in this article we briefly summarizes the differences between force majeure and change of circumstances6, and we hope it can help the reader choose the application of force majeure or change of circumstances in specific cases[5]:
| 維度 Perspective |
不可抗力 Force Majeure |
情勢變更 Change of Circumstances |
| 權利性質 Nature of the Right |
解除權為形成權 Right of termination is a right of formation |
解除權為請求權 Right of termination is a right to claim |
| 權利的啟動 Initiation of the Right |
法院可依職權適用 The court can apply according to its functions and powers |
當事人須主張 It shall be initiated by the contracting party |
| 適用范圍 Scope of Application |
金錢之債一般不適用 Generally not apply to request for monetary debt |
金錢之債不適用 May not apply to request for monetary debt |
| 既可免除違約責任，又可免除侵權責任 Both liabilities for breach and tort can be relieved |
主要適用于合同關系，不能用于侵權責任的免除 Mainly apply to contract; not applicable to relief of tort liability |
|
| 法律責任 Legal Responsibilities |
主要在于免除或減輕當事人的責任 Mainly to relieve or alleviate the liabilities of the contracting party |
主要解決當事人權益得失的公平問題 Mainly to resolve the problem of unbalanced interests between the parties |
[1] 例如：《合同法》第311條 不可抗力情況下承運人的賠償責任、第314條 不可抗力導致貨物滅失的運費處理等。
[1] For example, carrier’s liability for loss in case of force majeure in Article 311 of the Contract Laws, the allocation of freight in case of loss of products caused by force majeure in Article 314 of the Contract Law.
[2] 《最高人民法院關于在防治傳染性非典型肺炎期間依法做好人民法院相關審判、執行工作的通知》（注：該文件現已廢止）第三條第三款 由于“非典”疫情原因，按原合同履行對一方當事人的權益有重大影響的合同糾紛案件，可以根據具體情況，適用公平原則處理。因政府及有關部門為防治“非典”疫情而采取行政措施直接導致合同不能履行，或者由于“非典”疫情的影響致使合同當事人根本不能履行而引起的糾紛，按照《中華人民共和國合同法》第一百一十七條和第一百一十八條的規定妥善處理。
[2] Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Doing Good Job of Trial and Enforcement by the People’s Court During SARS (Repealed) Article 3 (3): Contractual disputes where performance in accordance with the originacontract will have a significant impact on the rights and interests of one party due to SARS can be resolved on the basis of fairness according to the specific circumstances. If a contract cannot be performed because of administrative measures taken by the government and relevant departments to prevent SARS, or the contracting party cannot perform the contract due to SARS, the disputes arising therefrom shall be properly resolved in accordance with Articles 117 and 118 of Contract Law of the People's Republic of China.
[3] 截至2020年01月30日，大陸31省（自治區、直轄市）均已啟動重大突發公共衛生事件一級響應。
[3] By January 30, 2020, first-level response to major public health emergencies had been lauched by all 31 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) in the mainland.
[4] 例一：（2018）魯06民終268號，例二：《不可抗力的構成要件與判斷標準》，郭揚輝，中國法院網，https://www.chinacourt.org/article/detail/2014/01/id/1172505.shtml
[4] Example #1: (2018) Lu 06 Minzhong No. 268 ; Example 2 Elements of Force Majeurce and its judgment standard, Guo Yanghui, China Court Website https://www.chinacourt.org/article/detail/2014/01/id/1172505.shtml
[5]最高人民法院《關于適用<中華人民共和國合同法>若干問題的解釋(二)》之情勢變更問題的理解與適用，曹守曄
[5]Understanding and Application of Change of Circumstances in Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning Application of the “Contract Law of the People's Republic of China” (2) , Cao Shouye
滬公網安備 31010402007129號
