In an intriguing turn of the legal tides, a court has recently dismissed a contractor’s claim that the COVID-19 pandemic rendered contract performance impossible. The precedent established is of particular interest to legal professionals.
The essence of contract law has always been the fulfillment of legally enforceable promises. If such commitments or “contracts” are not upheld, it is typical for courts to intervene. This can lead to orders of performance, compensation, or granting some other form of relief. Of course, exceptions to this overarching rule exist, and have been developed over time in response to varying circumstances.
Yet, even considering these exceptions, the court’s disposal of the claim brought forward by a contractor on the basis of the COVID-19 pandemic rendering their contract fulfillment impossible is an interesting development. We only have the output of public records at this stage from Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP.
As legal professionals, it is paramount to think about how such scenarios may impact our own clients. While the decision may be unique to the circumstances at hand, it nevertheless invites considerations about the future legal landscape. In circumstances as globally impacting and unexpected as a pandemic, how will our legal processes and provisions adapt?
At this moment, the exact court decisions and factors leading to the refusal of COVID-19 as a legitimate reason for contract non-fulfillment are yet to be publicized. Hence, it is important for legal practitioners to monitor closely for any updates in court rulings or potential legislative changes.
The areas of potential impact expand across industries and business types – Fortune 500 companies, family businesses, and nonprofit organizations, to name but a few. This ruling, and others that may follow, need to act as guiding principles for contract formation, assessment, and enforcement in our law firms and corporations.
While the lessons to be learnt from this court’s ruling are yet to be fully discovered, it certainly warrants further discussion and consideration amongst legal professionals. Even if the decision is not bound to stay, it provides a precedent for future contract disputes amidst global adversities of a similar scale and nature.