chapter 16

1. the concept of termination

termination of a contract refers to the legal ending of a contract, rendering it no longer binding on the parties involved

a contract can be terminated in two primary ways

  1. by mutual consent

  2. for a cause permitted by law

there are also other special reasons under which a contract may be terminated

  • a contract contingent on conditions subsequent

  • a right of withdrawal is explicitly included

  • revocation or renunciation by one party is permitted under certain conditions

the italian civil code recognizes three specific situations where the termination of a contract may arise due to factors other than parties performing contractual obligations

  1. breach or non-performance: a contract may be terminated if a party fails to perform their obligations

  2. supervening impossibility: occurs when an unforeseen event makes it impossible to perform their obligations

  3. excessive onerousness: if, due to unforeseeable circumstances, the performance of a contract becomes excessively burdensome or onerous for one party, they may request termination

2. dissolution as a result of breach of contract

in contracts for mutual counter-performance, where both parties are obligated to provide performance, the occurrence of a breach by one party offers the innocent party several legal options

→ they can either enforce the contract or dissolve it

regardless of what they do, they are able to seek compensation

conditions for dissolution

  • proportionality of reaction to the breach: the seriousness of the response to a breach must be proportionate to the seriousness of the breach itself

  • minor breach: is the breach is of minor importance, the breaching party is liable for damages, but the innocent party cannot seek dissolution

in contracts for mutual counter-performance, each party has the right to withhold their performance if the other party fails to perform or offers to perform their obligations simultaneously

→ withholding performance is not permissible if, under the circumstances, doing so would be against the principle of good faith

the innocent party can demand the dissolution of the contract even after having initially sought performance, however, once an action for dissolution has been initiated, demanding exact performance is no longer an option

3. out-of-court dissolutions for breach

there are three main types of out-of-court dissolutions

notice to perform

in cases of significant breach, the innocent party may issue a notice to perform

→ sending a written notice to the breaching party, stating that they must fulfill their contractual obligation within a specified period

the notice must clearly indicate that failure to render exact performance within the given time frame will result in the dissolution of the contract

the period given is usually no less than 15 days unless justified

if they fail to comply, the contract is automatically dissolved

explicit dissolution clause

the parties to a contract may include an explicit dissolution clause, specifying that the contract will be dissolved if a certain obligation is not performed in the agreed manner

if the innocent party decides to not invoke the clause, the contract remains in effect

essentiality of time for one party

the contract may also be dissolved if the time specified for performance by one of the parties is considered essential to the interests of the other party

if one party intends to rely on this form of dissolution, they must explicitly declare their wish to dissolve the contract

failure to demand performance within three days after the deadline results in the dissolution of the contract unless otherwise agreed or customary

4. dissolution for supervening impossibility

supervening impossibility occurs when the performance of a contractual obligation becomes impossible due to circumstances beyond their control

if the performance of an obligation becomes impossible due to a reason that is not attributable to the debtor, the debtor is released from the obligation to perform

in contracts with mutual obligations, if one’s obligation becomes impossible to fulfill, the other is released from their duty as well

there is no need for formal action

when the performance of an obligation becomes partially impossible, the unaffected party is entitled to a reduction in their own corresponding obligation

→ the unaffected party may also choose to withdraw from the contract altogether if the partial performance does not provide an appreciable benefit or if they have no significant interest in partial performance.

if the impossibility to perform is temporary, the obligation may be suspended until the performance becomes possible again

→ it may be terminated if after that it becomes useless

for contracts that involve the transfer of ownership or the creation/transfer of limited rights in a specific property, the destruction of the property due to a cause not attributable to the transferor does not release the transferee from their obligation to pay

5. dissolution for excessive onerousness

dissolution for excessive onerousness is a legal remedy available in contract where an unforeseen event causes one party’s obligation to become excessively burdensome or difficult to fulfill

in contracts for mutual counter-performance, the economic balance between the parties' obligations is generally determined by their own agreement and judgment

excessive onerousness occurs when the performance of a contractual obligation becomes significantly more burdensome than originally anticipated, to an extent that goes beyond normal business risks

conditions for invoking dissolution for excessive onerousness

  • extraordinary and unpredictable events

  • normal business risk excluded

if transportation costs for importing goods from Asia to Europe increase by 50% due to a sudden geopolitical event, this might qualify as excessive onerousness because it is both extraordinary and unpredictable

aleatory contracts don’t count

the party against whom dissolution for excessive onerousness is sought can avoid dissolution by offering to modify the terms of the contract to restore a fair balance

6. rescission of the contract

in the italian legal system, a contract may still be considered valid, yet one of the parties may view its terms as unfair due to a significant economic imbalance

→ the remedy is rescission

generally, the law does not protect individuals from bad business decisions or unequal bargains unless specific legal grounds are met, the fact that a contract is economically imbalanced does not automatically render it invalid

contracts can be annulled if there is a fundamental mistake regarding the quality or quantity of the object or if the imbalance is due to fraud

rescission is possible in specific cases where the economic imbalance arises from the exploitation of a party's vulnerable state, such as state of danger or state of need

rescission due to state of danger: when one party assumes obligations under unfair conditions to save themselves or others from imminent and serious personal injury, and the other party knows about this situation

rescission due to state of need: when a contract is formed under significantly unfair conditions because one party was in a state of need, and the other party was aware of this at the time of the contract

the economic injury must be substantial, exceeding half the value

the action for rescission must be filed within one year of the contract's conclusion

rescission is not available if the situation does not involve a true economic imbalance