UCP 600 Article 36: Force Majeure Events Defined

Introduction

UCP 600 Article 36 enumerates specific events that qualify as force majeure for documentary credit purposes. The list includes Acts of God, riots, civil commotions, insurrections, wars, terrorism, strikes, lockouts, and — crucially — "any other causes beyond its control." This catch-all phrase requires careful interpretation: not every disruption qualifies. The event must be extraordinary, beyond the bank's control, and must have actually interrupted the bank's business. This guide defines each enumerated event, analyzes the catch-all category, and identifies where practitioners most frequently misclassify disruptions.

Failure Mode Analysis

Failure 1: Classifying a pandemic as Article 36. Pandemics are not expressly listed in Article 36. Whether a pandemic qualifies depends on whether it actually interrupted the specific bank's business. A general pandemic that does not prevent the bank from operating does not trigger Article 36.

Failure 2: Classifying a power outage as Article 36. A temporary power outage may not qualify if the bank has backup power or if the outage is short. Article 36 requires the interruption to have actually prevented the bank from performing its obligations.

Failure 3: Classifying a cyberattack as Article 36. A cyberattack that disables the bank's systems may qualify under "other causes beyond its control," but only if the attack was genuinely beyond the bank's control (e.g., external attack, not a system failure caused by the bank's own negligence).

Failure 4: Classifying a government-ordered closure as Article 36. Government-ordered closures (e.g., during a pandemic or civil emergency) may qualify under "other causes beyond its control," but the bank must verify that the closure was beyond its control and actually prevented operations.

Failure 5: Failing to distinguish Article 36 from Article 29. A scheduled bank holiday is an Article 29 event, not an Article 36 event. A bank that applies Article 36 to a scheduled holiday is misclassifying the event.

Deterministic Resolution Architecture

1. Review the Article 36 event list. The enumerated events are: Acts of God, riots, civil commotions, insurrections, wars, terrorism, strikes, lockouts, and other causes beyond the bank's control.

2. Test the catch-all category. For events not expressly listed, determine whether the event was (a) beyond the bank's control, (b) extraordinary, and (c) actually interrupted the bank's business.

3. Verify the interruption. Article 36 applies only when the event actually prevented the bank from performing. A threat or general disruption that does not prevent the bank from operating does not trigger Article 36.

4. Distinguish from Article 29. Scheduled closures, holidays, and maintenance are Article 29 events. Only extraordinary interruptions qualify under Article 36.

5. Document the classification. Record the event, its cause, the evidence that it was beyond the bank's control, and the evidence that it actually interrupted operations. Preserve the classification with the presentation file.

6. Apply the correct provision. If the event qualifies under Article 36, apply the Article 36 rules (no liability for consequences, credit expiry during interruption not revived). If not, apply the ordinary rules under Articles 14 and 29.

7. Preserve the event record. Maintain a documented record of the event classification for audit and legal purposes.

Conclusion

The Article 36 event list is specific but includes a catch-all category that requires careful interpretation. Not every disruption qualifies. The event must be extraordinary, beyond the bank's control, and must have actually interrupted the bank's business. The defensible method is a documented classification that tests each element of the Article 36 requirement and distinguishes the event from ordinary closures under Article 29.

FAQ

Is a pandemic an Article 36 event? Not automatically. Whether a pandemic qualifies depends on whether it actually interrupted the specific bank's business. A general pandemic that does not prevent the bank from operating does not trigger Article 36.

Is a cyberattack an Article 36 event? It may qualify under "other causes beyond its control," but only if the attack was genuinely beyond the bank's control and actually prevented operations.

What about a government-ordered closure? It may qualify under "other causes beyond its control," but the bank must verify that the closure was beyond its control and actually prevented operations.

Does Article 36 apply to all banks simultaneously? No. Article 36 applies to the specific bank whose business was interrupted. Other banks in the same city may remain open.

How does URDG 758 define force majeure events? URDG 758, Article 26, uses a similar list: acts of God, riots, civil commotions, insurrections, wars, strikes, lockouts, and any other causes beyond the guarantor's control. The framework parallels UCP 600 Article 36.

Source Notes

Context only — no deep source text was extracted from the original research feeds.

• ICC Academy, "Uniform Rules for Documentary Credits (UCP 600) — eBook," published 12 Dec 2024.
• ICC, "UCP 600 — Uniform Rules and Practice for Documentary Credits — Including eUCP Version 2.1," published 31 Jul 2023.
• ICC, "Commentary on UCP 600," published 01 Aug 2019.
• ICC Academy, "Certified UCP 600 Specialist (CUCP)," published 12 Jul 2025.
• ICC Academy, "ICC Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees (URDG 758) — eBook," published 12 Dec 2024.