[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, partial or full exemption from liability is possible, but there are strict prerequisites: the event must be unforeseeable, unavoidable, and insurmountable (all three conditions must be met simultaneously); the scope of exemption is limited to the impact of force majeure; and the party claiming exemption must notify the other party in a timely manner and provide proof within a reasonable period. Note two exceptions to exemption: exemption is not granted if force majeure occurs after a delay in performance, and the delay in performance of monetary obligations is generally not exempted due to force majeure.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

High-frequency scenarios of force majeure: work stoppages and production suspensions caused by pandemic lockdowns, damage to assets due to floods and earthquakes, government expropriation and requisition, and export controls in international trade. Common misunderstandings of enterprises: attributing "difficulties in business operations" to force majeure; failing to understand the other party's obligation to mitigate losses after receiving a notice of force majeure; and believing that invoking force majeure can lead to indefinite delays.

II. Key points of contention

1. Proof of the first three elements. "Unforeseeable" is measured by the standards of a reasonable businessperson, and "unavoidable and unsurmountable" refers to objective obstacles rather than subjective difficulties; there are significant differences in the qualification of policy adjustments and market fluctuations from case to case. 2. Causality and proportion. The exemption only covers the part directly caused by force majeure, and the losses must be divided into the "force majeure part" and the "own cause part". 3. Procedural obligations. Timely notification (to prevent the other party's losses from expanding), providing proof within a reasonable timeframe (notarization, official documents, third-party certificates), and taking mitigation measures. The failure to fulfill any of these obligations may result in a reduction of the exemption scope.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

The operation of claiming force majeure proceeds in three layers: "qualification - cutting - procedure". **Qualification layer**: First, assess whether the event simultaneously meets the three criteria: - Foreseeable likelihood at the time of contract signing (epidemic trends known before signing are not considered force majeure); - Practical possibility of avoidance or mitigation (alternative routes or postponable production obstacles may be questioned); - Directness of the event. A legal boundary separates "difficult to do" from "impossible to do". Commercial risks (market declines, raw material price increases) never constitute force majeure. **Cutting layer**: Measure the impact period and scope: - Number of days of production suspension; - Batches affected; - Separate direct and indirect losses from delayed delivery; - Claim for exemption based on the proportion of impact, rather than blanket exemption. Simultaneously, assess whether the contractual purpose is fundamentally unattainable (if force majeure causes the contractual purpose to fail, the contract may be legally terminated, not just exempted from liability). **Procedure layer**: - Send notification within a reasonable time after the event (specifying impact and expected duration); - Submit supporting documents (government announcements, suspension notices, logistics disruption proofs, notarized documents) on schedule; - Document mitigation actions (transferring orders, negotiating alternatives) throughout the process. The quality of these three obligations directly determines the extent of exemption and the counterparty's risk of "aggravated losses" in a counterclaim. **Counterparty's response**: - Receiving a force majeure notification does not mean passively waiting. - Verify supporting documents; - Clarify the scope of impact; - Negotiate modifications (extension, installment, alternative performance) rather than waiting for default to occur. - For cases of "violation disguised as force majeure", collect counterevidence of the counterparty's normal operations during the same period (employee activity, logistics records, social media). - Challenge the "feasibility of mitigation" of the three criteria.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The first step is to promptly determine the nature of the event: evaluate the nature of the event based on the three essential elements, and distinguish between commercial risks and force majeure. The second step is to quantify the impact by period and scope, and claim exemption from liability proportionally. The third step is to ensure a closed-loop process: document each of the three obligations (notification, proof, and mitigation) in detail. The fourth step is to select the optimal solution based on the impact: continue performance, modify the contract, or terminate the contract according to the degree of impact. Main legal basis: Article 180 (force majeure) and Article 563 (statutory termination) of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective since 2021), Article 590 (exemption from liability and notification obligations in the event of force majeure), and Article 591 (obligation to mitigate losses). Specific application shall be subject to the currently effective regulations.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

Force majeure is a "defense with thresholds": all three elements, the impact ratio, and the proof of notification must be met. If any one of them is missing, the defense will be discounted. In the first week of encountering sudden obstacles, notification and leaving a record are more important than any defense argument. Disputes involving the defense of force majeure can be resolved throughBusiness and contract disputes in enterprisesFor obtaining a comprehensive solution for services, involving the qualitative analysis of special events such as the epidemic situation, you can refer to the special topic on the epidemic situation in this batch. For issues related to changes in circumstances and termination, you can combine with the special topic on changes in circumstances in this batch. For matters concerning the design of the contract system and risk clauses, you can make reference to it.Specialised legal servicesRegarding the employment and wage arrangements during the suspension of work and production, you may pay attention to the relevant provisions in the "Guiding Opinions on the Employment and Wage Arrangements during the Suspension of Work and Production in the Construction Industry" issued by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security.Labor disputes and work-related injury compensationFor reference, the settlement and recourse of funds after force majeure can be referred to the provisions of the "Platform Agreement".Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcement cases板块。

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Is a drop in the market considered an act of force majeure?

No. Commercial risks (price fluctuations, operational difficulties) do not constitute force majeure, so the invocation is invalid.

Q2: Can force majeure exempt one from all liability?

Within the limits of the impact: those parts that can be partially performed shall be exempt from liability, and those parts that cannot be performed at all shall be exempt from liability entirely; the part of the expanded losses shall not be exempt from liability.

Q3: Is there an exemption from liability if force majeure occurs during the delay period?

The occurrence of force majeure after a delay in performance does not exempt the party from liability, which is a clear statutory exclusionary circumstance.

Q4: Can force majeure be invoked even if someone refuses to repay a debt?

In principle, the liability for delay in monetary debts is not exempted due to force majeure, and it is difficult to use this as a defense against the obligation to make payments.

Q5: Do government documents need to be notarized?

The government announcements and the notice of suspension of work are themselves legally binding. However, if the documents involve foreign parties or are not recognized by the other party, it is more reliable to have them notarized or consular-authenticated.

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

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, so as 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 open 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. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.