[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, a party may be liable for the expanded losses, but it does not necessarily lose the right to exemption from liability. According to Article 590 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021), if a party is unable to perform the contract due to force majeure, it may be partially or entirely exempted from liability according to the impact of the force majeure; if the force majeure occurs after the party's delay in performance, it shall not be exempted from its breach of contract liability. The article also requires that if a party is unable to perform the contract due to force majeure, it shall notify the other party in a timely manner to mitigate the possible losses to the other party, and shall provide proof within a reasonable period of time. Therefore, although late notification does not necessarily lead to the loss of exemption from liability, if the other party's losses are expanded due to the failure to notify in a timely manner, the party may bear liability for the expanded losses; whether exemption from liability is possible still mainly depends on the causal relationship between force majeure and the inability to perform the contract.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

After the occurrence of force majeure, the procedural obligations that parties should fulfill are often overlooked. Typical situations include: enterprises being unable to deliver goods on time due to typhoons, floods, or lockdowns, and forgetting to notify the buyers while busy saving themselves; one party notifying the other party but failing to provide proof within a reasonable timeframe; and the other party refusing to acknowledge the exemption from liability on the grounds of "late notification" and demanding compensation for losses. In contract disputes in the Beijing area, the obligation to notify and the obligation to provide proof are important criteria for measuring whether parties have performed their obligations in good faith. Failure to notify in a timely manner often leads to disputes over the extent of the losses.

II. Key points of contention

First, the legal basis and performance standards of the obligation to notify and the obligation to provide proof. Second, how to determine "timely" and "reasonable timeframes". Third, whether a late notification affects the establishment of exemption from liability due to force majeure. Fourth, how to determine the scope of liability for losses that are exacerbated due to a failure to notify in a timely manner. Fifth, the methods of providing evidence when the other party refuses to acknowledge the existence of force majeure. Sixth, the key points regarding the form of notification, delivery, and preservation of evidence.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Here is the translation of the Chinese (Simplified) sentence into English, with detailed explanations: \nHenglue Lawyers provide four practical tips on contract dispute cases. First, the basis of exemption from liability lies in causality: The core of exemption from liability due to force majeure is the causal relationship between force majeure and the inability to perform. The obligation to notify is an ancillary obligation. Generally, late notification does not affect the establishment of exemption from liability itself, unless otherwise stipulated by law. Second, the significance of the obligation to notify lies in damage control: According to Article 590 of the Civil Code, the party affected by force majeure shall promptly notify the other party to mitigate the potential losses to the other party and provide proof within a reasonable period. The purpose of this obligation is to prevent unreasonable expansion of losses. Third, liability for expanded losses: If the other party's losses that could have been avoided or reduced occur due to late notification, the party with the obligation to notify may bear compensation for the expanded portion of losses; in other words, the consequence of late notification is to "narrow the scope of exemption from liability" rather than "complete loss of exemption from liability". Fourth, operational key points: After the occurrence of force majeure, the party with the obligation to notify shall promptly notify the other party in writing, stating the nature of the event, its impact, and the expected duration, and attach relevant proof; retain the records of sending and delivery, and continuously update the progress; if the other party raises objections, the party with the obligation to notify shall provide evidence regarding the objectivity of force majeure and the causal relationship. Overall, the main risk of late notification lies in expanded compensation for losses rather than automatic loss of exemption from liability. Henglue Lawyers typically provide support by sorting out the notification timing, assessing the causality of losses, and designing communication plans.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action suggestions: First, immediately notify the other party in writing of the occurrence of force majeure, explain the situation and indicate the mitigation measures to be taken; Second, simultaneously collect and preserve materials such as government announcements, meteorological and disaster certificates; Third, provide formal certificates within a reasonable period of time and continuously inform the progress; Fourth, assess whether the other party's losses have been exacerbated due to the delay in notification, and, if necessary, actively negotiate to share the losses; Fifth, in the event that the other party refuses to acknowledge the force majeure, provide evidence of the force majeure and causality and retain communication records. For matters involving enterprise operations and contracts, the above suggestions can be referred to for reference.Business and contract disputes in enterprisesFor matters involving the recovery and enforcement of creditor's rights, you may refer to the following for reference.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcementLegal basis: Articles 180 and 590 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective as of January 1, 2021). The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial decisions.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, the core of exemption from liability due to force majeure is causality, and the obligation to notify is an ancillary obligation. Secondly, if the notification is sent late, the exemption from liability will not be automatically lost, but the party may be liable for the expanded losses. Thirdly, the party should provide proof within a reasonable period of time and keep the records of sending and delivery. Fourthly, continuously updating the progress of the event and mitigation measures will help gain the other party's understanding and cooperation. Fifthly, if the force majeure occurs after the delay in performance, the liability for breach of contract shall not be exempted, and the party should perform its obligations within the normal performance period. For other difficult issues, please refer to the relevant provisions for reference.Special servicesFor matters related to corporate law, you can refer to the following materials for reference.Intellectual property protection and corporate lawFor those related to finance and cross-border transactions, you can refer to the following materials for reference.\nFinancial capital and cross-border transactions involving foreign entities.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: What will happen if the notice of force majeure is sent too late?

They may be liable for compensating for the expanded losses. The obligation to notify is intended to mitigate the other party's losses. If the losses are expanded due to a failure to notify in a timely manner, they may be held responsible for the expanded portion of the losses; however, the exemption from liability primarily depends on the causal relationship between force majeure and the inability to perform the contract.

Q2: Can't I be exempt from liability if I send the message too late?

Generally, it can still be claimed. The basis of exemption from liability due to force majeure is causality. Notifying late usually does not automatically result in the loss of exemption from liability, but it may reduce the scope of exemption from liability. It needs to be judged in light of whether the other party's losses have been exacerbated as a result of this.

Q3: How long does it take to be considered a timely notification?

The law does not stipulate a fixed time limit. Generally, it requires that the notice be given as soon as possible within a reasonable time after knowing or should have known about the occurrence of force majeure, and the determination shall be made based on the nature of the event, the communication conditions, and industry practices.

Q4: What materials do I need to provide for the notification?

It should explain the nature of the force majeure, the scope of its impact, and its expected duration, and attach materials such as government announcements and disaster certificates; subsequently, it should provide formal certificates within a reasonable timeframe and continue to report on the progress made.

Q5: What should I do if the other party doesn't recognize force majeure?

The burden of proof should focus on the objectivity and causality of force majeure. Official announcements, certificates of suspension of work, and materials related to logistics disruptions should be submitted, and notification and communication records should be preserved. If necessary, the matter should be resolved through litigation or arbitration.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. There may be differences in the adjudication opinions in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Business and commercial legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and public adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in a timely manner.