Preview

Effect of Force Majeure or Act of God on Legal Deeds

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
473 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Effect of Force Majeure or Act of God on Legal Deeds
Effect of Force Majeure or Act of God
If upon the happening of a fortuitous event or an act of God, there concurs a corresponding fraud, negligence, delay or violation or contravention in any manner of the tenor of the obligation as provided for in Article 1170 of the Civil Code, which results in loss or damage, the obligor cannot escape liability.
It has been held that when the negligence of a person concurs with an act of God in producing a loss, such person is not exempt from liability by showing that the immediate cause of the damage was the act of God. To be exempt from liability for loss because of an act of God, he must be free from any previous negligence or misconduct by which that loss or damage may have been occasioned.
Fortuitous Event - an event which could not be foreseen, or which, though foreseen is inevitable.

Essential Characteristics of a Fortuitous Event 1. Cause is independent on the will of the debtor; 2. Impossibility of foreseeing or impossibility of avoiding it to be foreseen even if foreseen; 3. Occurrence renders it impossible for debtor to fulfill his obligation in a normal manner; and 4. Debtor is free from any participation in the aggravation of the injury to the creditor.
General Rule: No liability in case of fortuitous event

Exceptions: 1. By contrary stipulation in the contract; 2. Declared by law e.g. Art 552(2), 1268, 1942, 2147, 2148, 2159 of the New Civil Code; 3. Nature of the obligation requires assumption of risk when expressly declared by law; 4. When the obligor is in default or has promised to deliver the same thing to 2 or more persons who do not have the same interests (Art. 1165 (3))
Art. 1174. 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

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Bugusa Case Summary

    • 521 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The tort of negligence applies in this scenario. Negligence is described as a party who fails to act reasonably, even when the act is not intentionally, or it does not intend for harm to occur (Melvin, 2011).…

    • 521 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Legt 1710 Assignment 1

    • 1249 Words
    • 5 Pages

    * Jones L Introduction to Business Law 1st, 2011, C11 the Tort Law of Negligence. P342…

    • 1249 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    En1320 Unit 1 Research Paper 1

    • 27742 Words
    • 111 Pages

    negligence, or under any other theory of liability) for any loss or damage of any kind or nature related to, arising under,…

    • 27742 Words
    • 111 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Case Brief

    • 607 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Plaintiffs argues recovery under the “reasonably Foreseeability” test, which would allow a Plaintiff outside the “Zone of Danger” to recover, which was adopted in Sinn v. Burd, 486 Pa. 146 (1979). The Court stated in response that the Plaintiff’s flexible interpretation of the “jurisprudential concept …which require[s] that the defendant’s breach of a duty of care proximately causes plaintiff’s injury,” was flawed. Moreover, that “at some point along the causal chain, the passage of time and the span of distance mandate a cut-off point for liability.” Id.…

    • 607 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Contracts I Course Outline

    • 2280 Words
    • 10 Pages

    1. A promise or apparent promise is not consideration if by its terms the promisor or…

    • 2280 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The doctrine of negligence per se applies if an event causing harm does not normally occur in the absence of negligence.…

    • 4685 Words
    • 31 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Chapter 6 outline

    • 985 Words
    • 4 Pages

    h. Strict liability statutes- crimes for which one may incur liability without fault or intent…

    • 985 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A breach would arise where a negligent act, or omission to act, resulted in harm to that individual and the harm was foreseeable.…

    • 907 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Negligence is defined as the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid injuring others or the property belonging to others. This would be if somebody does not exercise the amount of care that a reasonable careful person would use under the circumstances or somebody does something that a reasonably careful person would not do under the circumstances. Fault is essential in a negligence tort and is determined by basic elements. In negligence action there are four elements that play a large determining role. The four elements include duty of care, breach of duty by the tortfeasor, causation of injury to the victim and damages to the victim. The elements of negligence action work together in tort law to determine the level of negligence of the tortfeasor. The first element is the legal duty to conform to a certain standard of conduct in order to protect other from unreasonable risk of harm. The second element is the breach of duty by the tortfeasor failing to conform to a certain standard of conduct. The third element is the causation of injury and establishing a casual connection between the conduct and the injury, which comes in two components, actual cause or proximate cause. The final element of negligence action is damages to the victim being actual damages. This element is proving that a monetary figure can be attached to the negligence claim. The damages can come as compensatory damage, punitive damages, or damages attributable to actual loss of physical property. With all these elements in place fault is irrelevant.…

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It applies to any weakness or predisposition of the plaintiff to a particular injury or illness regardless of the defendant’s knowledge. An illustration of this rule can be found in the following case which are; Smith v Leech Brain & Co Ltd (1962) and Robinson v Post office (1974) 1 WLR 1176. The case of Smith v Leech Brain is about a galvanizer who is the plaintiff’s husband and work at the defendant’s company. His job is to lift articles into a tank of a molten metal via a crane. The plaintiff’s husband was burnt on the lip by a piece of molten metal because of the defendant’s negligence. However, the plaintiff’s husband actually had a pre-cancerous condition and the burn caused a cancerous growth. As a result, he eventually died three years later. The court held that the defendant was liable because the burn was foreseeable damage for the plaintiff’s negligence. It does not matter to what extent of the damage or injuries as long as the type of damage or physical injury is foreseeable. In this case, the burn resulted to the death of the plaintiff and therefore the defendant was liable for his death. The defendant was liable for the full consequences including the cancer even though the healthy person would not developed cancer in the same circumstances. Lord Parker CJ stated that the test is not whether these employers could reasonably have foreseen that a burn would cause cancer and that he would die. The…

    • 1329 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Principle of Double Effect

    • 1089 Words
    • 5 Pages

    3. The rescuer is not intending to die. His intent is to save the child. If, on the other hand, the rescuer used the opportunity to rescue the child as a subterfuge to mask his own suicide and intended his own death to occur, his intent would violate the third element of the principle. However, there is no reason to assume that such was his intention.…

    • 1089 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    (c) Modern view :- In recent times, however, the doctrine of vicarious liability is justified on the principle other than that embodied in the above-mentioned maxims. It is now believed that the underlying idea of this doctrine is that of…

    • 550 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    CHAPTER 1. – GENERAL PROVISIONS See Arts. 1156 - 1162 ELEMENTS OF AN OBLIGATION: 1. Active subject (obligee/creditor): one in whose favor the obligation is constituted 2. Passive subject (obligor/debtor): one who has the duty of giving, doing or not doing 3. Object: prestation; the conduct which has to be observed by the debtor/obligor REQUISITES 1. it must be licit (otherwise it is void) 2. it must be possible, physically and juridically (otherwise it is void) 3. it must be determinate or determinable (otherwise it is void) 4. it must have pecuniary value a. Vinculum Juris: juridical/legal tie; binds the parties to the obligation b. Causa (causa debendi/causa obligationes): why obligation exists SOURCES OF OBLIGATION…

    • 14857 Words
    • 60 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Fault Element in Delict

    • 4298 Words
    • 18 Pages

    In the archaic legal orders, liability under the law of delict was independent of fault. Someone causing harm to property or personality of another was held liable, because experience taught that people, who commit certain harmful acts, as a rule, intend to cause harm. Over time, however, intent became an explicit requirement for all delictual liability. Negligence constituted liability only under the Aquilian action. However, as stated above, the principle that there should be no liability without negligence derives from Roman law. The requirement of fault is not usually found in more primitive legal systems, where a person is held liable for…

    • 4298 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Act of God

    • 552 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In the law of torts, an act of God may be asserted as a type of intervening cause, the lack of which would have avoided the cause or diminished the result of liability (e.g., but for the earthquake, the old, poorly constructed building would be standing). However, foreseeable results of unforeseeable causes may still raise liability. For example, a bolt of lightning strikes a ship carrying volatile compressed gas, resulting in the expected…

    • 552 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays