Ukrainian agribusiness, like the whole country, has found itself in a difficult situation due to the Russian invasion, requiring the use of extraordinary legal options for resolving contractual disputes. Margarita Bryanskaya and Bogdan Yaskiv explain how farmers can solve problems with the implementation of foreign economic contracts (foreign trade contracts) in the article “War does not automatically cancel the fulfillment of previously taken business obligations”.

In the conditions of martial law in the context of the implementation of foreign trade contracts, farmers usually face the following situations:.

it is impossible to fulfill the obligation at all (debt in kind or pay for a delivery);

it is impossible to fulfill certain conditions of the contract (term, delivery method, assortment, quantity, etc.).

In the first case, we are talking, as a rule, about the destruction of goods (destruction of crops or storage, theft of agricultural products by occupiers, etc.).. ) or about the loss of control over it by the owners (for example, crops or elevators are located in the occupied territory).

In this case, force majeure circumstances will apply, but they release from liability, and not from the fulfillment of the obligation as a whole. Therefore, you should contact the counterparty with a proposal to terminate such an agreement in general due to the objective impossibility of fulfilling it on time, or, if possible, initiate changes to it about the product itself or the timing of its delivery.

[see_also ids\u003d"

In the second case, the situation is a bit simpler: the product itself is or will be in stock in the near future, but the seller is not able to fulfill the conditions for the term or method of delivery. Again, force majeure will help, but negotiations should be initiated on amending the contract on the timing and method of fulfilling the obligation.

For example, it is possible to offer an alternative option for the delivery of goods by rail or road, if its quantity allows, but imposing the obligation to pay the cost of transportation and insurance of goods in transit depends directly on the negotiating power of the party and previous agreements.