疫情防控常态化下的“情势变更”与“不可抗力”——以《民法典》适用为视角

“Change of circumstances”and“force majeure”under the normalization of epidemic prevention and control:from the perspective of the application of Civil Code

一直以来,无论是学界还是实务界对于因突发公共卫生事件导致的合同履行纠纷应适用“情势变更”还是“不可抗力”均存在较大争议,新出台的《民法典》对“情势变更”规则的修订更是将这一争论推向了高潮。“情势变更”与“不可抗力”并不是一种非此即彼的对立或排斥关系,而是一种可以互相转化的兼容关系。因新冠肺炎疫情及其防控导致的合同履行纠纷应适用何种规则,关键要看合同履行“不能”还是合同履行“显失公平”。因此,法院在审理案件时,可以参照适用“三步走”规则,准确把握疫情及其防控措施与合同不能履行之间的因果关系和原因力大小,妥善处理“情势变更”与“不可抗力”的关系,杜绝“一刀切”式的审判方式,力争达到个案平衡。

For a long time,both the academic and practical circles have great disputes on whether“change of circumstances”or“force majeure”should be applied to disputes over the performance of contracts caused by public health emergencies.The newly issued Civil Code's amendment to the rule of“change of circumstances”has brought this debate to a climax.“Change of circumstances”and“force majeure”are not antagonistic or exclusive relations,but compatible relations that can be transformed into each other.When we decide which rule should be applied to the disputes over contract performance caused by the novel coronavirus pneumonia prevention and control,the key is to see whether the contract performance results in“failure to perform”or“manifest injustice”.Therefore the court can apply the“three-step”rule when considering a case,and accurately grasp the causal relationship and causal force between the epidemic situation and its prevention and control measures and the failure to perform the contract,properly deal with the relationship between“change of circumstances”and“force majeure”,eliminate the one-size-fits-all approach to trial and strive to achieve a balance in each case.