<![CDATA[This article examines force majeure as a legal mechanism that limits the strict application of pacta sunt servanda when exceptional events render contractual performance impossible. The research problem lies in the absence of a clear, codified standard for force majeure in Jordanian law, where the doctrine is treated as a foreign cause under Article 261 of the Jordanian Civil Code, and its scope is largely shaped by judicial discretion. This raises uncertainty in distinguishing force majeure from hardship and other doctrines of changed circumstances. The article therefore asks: to what extent does the absence of codification of force majeure in Jordanian law affect legal certainty and judicial consistency compared with the codified French model? The study adopts a qualitative doctrinal legal method, using a descriptive-analytical and functional comparative approach. It relies on secondary legal materials, including statutory provisions, judicial decisions, legal commentaries, and relevant academic literature, which are analysed through doctrinal and comparative legal analyses. The findings show that French law, through Article 1218 of the Civil Code, provides a structured framework based on unforeseeability, irresistibility, and the prevention of contractual performance, thereby enhancing predictability while preserving judicial flexibility. By contrast, Jordanian law recognises force majeure but lacks an independent statutory definition or detailed criteria, which may lead to inconsistent application. The article contributes to comparative contract law by clarifying the relationship between codification, judicial discretion, and legal certainty. It argues that Jordanian law would benefit from clearer legislative guidance or from authoritative judicial criteria to improve coherence, contractual stability, and fairness in exceptional circumstances.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
