Hardship Under the CISG in Light of Its Interpretive Framework and the Limits of Article 79

Hardship under CISG i lyset af konventionens fortolkningsramme og grænserne for artikel 79

Tolmer, Anna Andrea Norup

4. term

Laws, Master

2026

2026-05-13

73

This thesis examines to what extent hardship can be recognized under the CISG (the international sales convention), focusing on the interpretation principles in Article 7 and the exemption rule in Article 79. The starting point is that the CISG does not expressly regulate hardship, even though unforeseen changes in international trade often upset the balance of a contract. Hardship refers to situations where performance remains possible but has become significantly more burdensome due to unforeseen circumstances. It differs from force majeure, which concerns cases where performance has become impossible. This distinction matters because the CISG is traditionally seen as addressing impossibility, while it is disputed whether it also covers performance that has become much harder or more expensive. The analysis assesses whether Article 79 can cover hardship. This hinges on how the term impediment is interpreted. A narrow reading suggests the provision applies only to impossibility, while a broader reading allows that substantial economic hardship may be included. There are arguments both for and against including hardship within Article 79. The thesis then considers whether hardship constitutes a gap under Article 7(2): an internal gap that can be filled by the convention’s general principles, or an external gap that must be addressed under applicable national law. Principles such as good faith and fair risk allocation may, in some circumstances, support reading hardship into the CISG, but there is no consensus. It also explores how far a party must go before being excused under Article 79 in hardship situations (the sacrifice threshold). The CISG sets no fixed percentage, and case law is limited and partly inconsistent. Assessment is therefore case by case, with weight on foreseeability, risk allocation, and the nature of the changed circumstances. Overall, the thesis concludes that the CISG does not provide a clear, uniform rule on hardship. The concept can be read into the convention to some extent via Article 7, but the legal position remains uncertain and shaped by diverging views on Article 79. Whether hardship is recognized depends on how the convention’s rules are interpreted and applied in the specific case.

Specialet undersøger, i hvilket omfang hardship kan anerkendes inden for CISG (den internationale købekonvention), med fokus på fortolkningsprincipperne i artikel 7 og fritagelsesreglen i artikel 79. Udgangspunktet er, at CISG ikke udtrykkeligt regulerer hardship, selv om uforudsete ændringer i internationale handler ofte kan forrykke balancen i en kontrakt. Hardship beskriver situationer, hvor opfyldelse stadig er mulig, men er blevet væsentligt mere byrdefuld på grund af uforudsete omstændigheder. Det adskiller sig fra force majeure, der angår tilfælde, hvor opfyldelse er blevet umulig. Denne sondring er central, fordi CISG traditionelt opfattes som rettet mod umulighed, mens det er omstridt, om konventionen også dækker markant vanskeligere eller dyrere opfyldelse. Analysen vurderer, om hardship kan rummes i artikel 79. Det afhænger især af, hvordan begrebet impediment (hindring) fortolkes. En snæver fortolkning peger på, at bestemmelsen kun gælder ved umulighed, mens en bredere fortolkning åbner for, at væsentlig økonomisk byrdefuldhed også kan være omfattet. Der findes således argumenter både for og imod at inddrage hardship under artikel 79. Dernæst behandles, om hardship kan ses som et gap efter artikel 7(2): et internt gap, der kan udfyldes via konventionens generelle principper, eller et eksternt gap, der må løses efter national ret. Principper som god tro og rimelig risikofordeling kan under visse betingelser tale for at fortolke hardship ind i CISG, men der er ikke enighed herom. Specialet undersøger også, hvor offergrænsen i artikel 79 kan ligge ved hardship, dvs. hvor langt en part skal gå, før den kan fritages. CISG angiver ingen fast procentsats, og retspraksis er begrænset og delvist modstridende. Vurderingen beror derfor på en helhedsbedømmelse, hvor forudsigelighed, aftalt risikofordeling og karakteren af de ændrede omstændigheder vejer tungt. Samlet konkluderes, at CISG ikke indeholder en klar og ensartet regulering af hardship. Begrebet kan til en vis grad indfortolkes via artikel 7, men retstilstanden er usikker og præget af forskellige opfattelser af artikel 79. Om hardship kan anerkendes, afhænger derfor af den konkrete fortolkning og anvendelse af konventionens regler.

[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]

CISG ; Hardship ; Article 79

Download PDF
View record in AAU Student Projects