Article citationsMore>>

Kaiser, R., & Hovsepyan, E. (2024). Secondary Sanctions and Force Majeure Clauses. In T. Ruys, C. Ryngaert, & F. R. Silvestre, (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Secondary Sanctions and International Law (pp. 333-361). Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009365840.019

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Force Majeure and Discharge of Performance in Contracts: The UK Supreme Court’s Judgment in RTI v MUR Shipping BV and the Ensuing Repercussions on Contractual Interpretation

  AUTHORS: Joseph Agburuwhuo Nwobike

  KEYWORDS: Force Majeure, Contractual Performance, Privity of Contract, Separate Corporate Personality, Contractual Interpretation, Compensatory Damages, Specific Performance, Braganza Principle

  JOURNAL NAME: Beijing Law Review, Vol.16 No.4, October 28, 2025

  ABSTRACT: In RTI Ltd v MUR Shipping BV (UKSC, 2024), the Supreme Court held that a party’s obligation to use reasonable endeavors to overcome a force-majeure event does not require acceptance of non-contractual performance: mitigation must proceed strictly by the contractually stipulated mode. This formalist stance sits uneasily with the mainstream of English mitigation doctrine and with interpretive commitments to commercial common sense, business efficacy, and relevant background facts, which often privilege attainment of contractual purpose over rigid adherence to form. The article contends that the Court’s reasoning is under-theorized: it engages only lightly with the implicated authorities on contractual interpretation and leaves unaddressed the bearing of privity and separate corporate personality. The result, the article argues, is a decision insufficiently attuned to commercial practice and the expectations of reasonable businesspeople. Unless overruled, it risks chilling transactions in a sanctions-sensitive trading environment and misaligning English contract legal framework with contemporary market realities.