Governance Risk & Operations · 4 April 2028
Force majeure is not a general legal protection Australian associations can simply assume applies to their conference or event contracts. It is purely a contractual concept, meaning the protection exists only if your venue or supplier contract actually contains a force majeure clause, and only to the extent that clause's specific wording covers what happens.
Why This Must Be Negotiated, Not Assumed
Australian law does not recognise force majeure as a general common law doctrine. It exists only where the contracting parties have deliberately written it into their agreement, and because it is a product of negotiation, its wording varies significantly from contract to contract. A venue contract with no force majeure clause at all leaves an association with no access to this protection whatsoever, regardless of how disruptive an unforeseen event turns out to be.
The Wording That Actually Decides Whether You Can Cancel Without Penalty
Real experience with disrupted major events has shown a stark difference between narrow and broad force majeure language. A clause using a restrictive illegal or impossible standard, still the most common wording, gives an association almost no room to cancel without penalty unless the event is unambiguously and legally prohibited by government order at that exact date and location. Associations with broader force majeure language have had a meaningfully easier time cancelling disrupted events without financial penalty. This is a genuine, actionable point worth raising directly during venue contract negotiation, before signing, rather than discovering the clause's real limitations only once a disruption has already occurred. The difference between a narrow and a broad force majeure clause is not a minor drafting preference. It is the difference between an association that can cancel a disrupted event without penalty and one locked into paying full contracted fees for an event it cannot hold.
The Harder Fallback, And Where State Law Genuinely Helps
Without a usable force majeure clause, an association's remaining option is the common law doctrine of frustration, difficult to establish. It is not enough that performance became merely difficult, uneconomic, or inconvenient; the disrupting event must be unforeseeable and must destroy the contract's fundamental purpose entirely. Courts are also less inclined to find frustration where a force majeure clause already exists in the contract, since its presence shows the parties had already turned their minds to this kind of risk. New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia have specific legislation providing a fairer outcome than pure common law frustration, which otherwise simply lets losses lie where they fall, meaning a forfeited deposit stays forfeited even where the disruption was entirely beyond anyone's control.
- Confirm whether your association's venue and supplier contracts contain a force majeure clause at all, since this protection does not exist under Australian law without one.
- Negotiate broad force majeure language before signing any significant venue contract, rather than accepting a narrow illegal or impossible standard by default.
- Understand that invoking force majeure or frustration does not automatically protect your association from Australian Consumer Law exposure if attendee ticket money is simply retained without any offer of alternative value.
- Confirm whether your specific state's frustration legislation applies to a disrupted contract, given NSW, Victoria, and South Australia offer fairer statutory outcomes than pure common law.
- Take documented steps to mitigate the impact of any disrupting event before relying on a force majeure clause, since most clauses require reasonable mitigation efforts as a condition of relief.
An association running conferences and major events carries real financial exposure the moment an unforeseen disruption makes an event impossible to hold as planned. The specific wording negotiated into a venue contract, well before any disruption ever occurs, determines whether that exposure is manageable or a costly, contractually locked-in commitment.
This is one of the practical governance topics built into our Board Director course — alongside the papers, tools and frameworks that turn the principle into your board's actual practice. Explore the course →
— Annie