Your Debtor Just Discovered a Pandemic

In most civil-law jurisdictions, force majeure is codified. Article 1218 of the French Code civil. Section 275 of the German BGB (Unmöglichkeit — impossibility). Article 1256 of the Italian Codice Civile. In common-law jurisdictions, force majeure exists only if the contract explicitly includes a force majeure clause and defines what events qualify.

In all cases, force majeure requires three elements: the event was unforeseeable, unavoidable, and external. And — the part most debtors omit — the event must have directly prevented performance. Not made it harder. Not made it more expensive. Prevented it.

A pandemic that shut down ports may excuse late delivery of physical goods. It does not excuse non-payment of an invoice for goods already delivered and received. War in a transit country may excuse delayed shipping. It does not excuse a solvent company in a stable jurisdiction from paying for services already rendered.

Pandemic. Supply chain disruption. War. Sanctions. Energy crisis. Currency collapse. Natural disaster. Government lockdown. These are all real events. They are also all events that debtors cite retrospectively, selectively, and creatively to defer payment on obligations that were due before the event occurred or are unrelated to the event's effects.

The test is simple: did this event make it impossible — not inconvenient, not unprofitable, but impossible — for the debtor to transfer money from their bank account to yours? If the debtor is still paying salaries, still paying rent, still paying other suppliers, the force majeure argument fails on its face. They can pay. They are choosing not to pay you.

Do not argue the legal definition of force majeure in an email. Instead, ask for documentation. Request written evidence of how the cited event directly prevented payment — not delivery, not operations, but payment specifically. Ask for a timeline: when did the event begin affecting their ability to pay, and when do they expect it to resolve?

Most debtors who cite force majeure tactically cannot produce this documentation because the connection does not exist. The request itself is the test. A debtor with a genuine force majeure situation will have documentation, will provide it, and will propose a realistic payment plan tied to the resolution of the event. A debtor using the phrase as cover will go silent, change the subject, or produce a second excuse.

It happens. A debtor in a sanctioned jurisdiction may genuinely be unable to transfer funds through the international banking system. A company whose factory was destroyed by a natural disaster may genuinely be unable to pay because the business no longer operates. A government-mandated closure may genuinely have eliminated the debtor's revenue for the duration.

In these cases, the collection strategy changes but does not stop. Payment plans, partial recovery, claim filing in insolvency proceedings, and debt restructuring are all routes that apply when the debtor's situation is genuine but not permanent. The key difference: a genuine force majeure debtor engages, communicates, and proposes solutions. A tactical one stalls, deflects, and waits for you to give up.