FORCE MAJEURE

Hi, it’s Deborah and Euzi

A recent case of arson attack on Sony’s warehouse in Enfield, North London, during the London Riots is an important reminder of the limitations of force majeure clauses. The judge determined that a break-in at the warehouse was foreseeable and could have been prevented by Sony by means of better building security. On this basis, this was not an event of force majeure under the contract because the failure to prevent the damage by fire was not “caused by circumstances beyond [Sony’s] reasonable control”. Sony could not have prevented the riot itself from occurring but this is not what mattered because it was not the riot that directly caused the damage. What caused the damage was the break-in and arson, which could have been prevented by Sony. Sony was therefore precluded from relying on the force majeure clause.

For further information on this case go to:

https://bit.ly/2TazZk5 

#freelegaladvice#bespokelegaladvice

#legaladvicefordivorcematters 

#legaladviceforlandlordandtenantmatters

#legaladviceforemploymentmatters

#mackenziefriend

#helpingyoutopreparetoattendatcourt

#affordablelawforyou