KONSEP FORCE MAJEURE DALAM SENGKETA WANPRESTASI PERDAGANGAN: STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 42/PDT/2025/PT PAL

Abstract

This study addresses challenges in applying the concept of force majeure in commercial breach of contract disputes, which frequently give rise to varying interpretations in judicial practice. It seeks to analyze the reasoning of judges in Decision Number 42/PDT/2025/PT PAL and to evaluate whether the force majeure claim satisfies the requirements set out in Articles 1244 and 1245 of the Indonesian Civil Code, while also examining it through the lens of Roscoe Pound’s legal theory. The research adopts a normative legal method, utilizing statutory analysis and a review of relevant literature. The findings reveal that, although the legal framework governing force majeure provides a relatively clear normative foundation, judges in practice apply a rigorous standard of assessment. This involves examining elements such as the presence of unforeseeable events, conditions beyond the debtor’s control, the absence of debtor fault, and a causal link to the failure to perform the obligation. In this case, the fire cited as a force majeure event was deemed insufficient to meet these requirements, resulting in the plaintiff being held liable for breach of contract. The analysis further demonstrates that judicial reasoning extends beyond strict adherence to written rules, incorporating an evaluation of factual circumstances and the good faith of the parties involved. From the standpoint of Roscoe Pound’s theory, the decision illustrates the role of law as an instrument of social engineering, functioning not only to resolve disputes but also to influence the conduct of legal actors. Accordingly, this study underscores the importance of consistent application of force majeure, strengthened evidentiary standards, and an enhanced judicial role in balancing legal certainty with fairness.