Georgia CommonsTitle 11. COMMERCIAL CODE · Chapter 2. · Article 2. SALES · Part 6. BREACH, REPUDIATION, AND EXCUSE
11-2-615. Excuse by failure of presupposed conditions.
Current through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.
Except so far as a seller may have assumed a greater obligation and subject to Code Section 11-2-614 on substituted performance:
- (a)
Delay in delivery or nondelivery in whole or in part by a seller who complies with paragraphs (b) and (c) of this Code section is not a breach of his duty under a contract for sale if performance as agreed has been made impracticable by the occurrence of a contingency the nonoccurrence of which was a basic assumption on which the contract was made or by compliance in good faith with any applicable foreign or domestic governmental regulation or order whether or not it later proves to be invalid.#
- (b)
Where the clauses mentioned in paragraph (a) of this Code section affect only a part of the seller’s capacity to perform, he must allocate production and deliveries among his customers but may at his option include regular customers not then under contract as well as his own requirements for further manufacture. He may so allocate in any manner which is fair and reasonable.#
- (c)
The seller must notify the buyer seasonably that there will be delay or nondelivery and, when allocation is required under paragraph (b) of this Code section, of the estimated quota thus made available for the buyer.#
History
Code 1933, § 109A-2-615, enacted by Ga. L. 1962, p. 156, § 1.
Law reviews
For article discussing the anachronistic nature of the Georgia contracts Code as dramatized by comparing the doctrine of consideration as it is formulated in the restatements of contracts and in former Title 20 of the Georgia Code of 1933, and the interpretative approach Georgia courts have taken in dealing with such Code, see 13 Ga. L. Rev. 449 (1979). For article, “Impracticability As Risk Allocation: The Effect of Changed Circumstances upon Contract Obligations for the Sale of Goods,” see 22 Ga. L. Rev. 503 (1988). For article, “The Future Use of Unconscionability and Impracticability as Contract Doctrines,” see 40 Mercer L. Rev. 937 (1989).
Read the official page (the state's PDF, opened at the page this text was read from).
Current through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.
Text read from t11-(v9)-2022-pdf.pdf, Volume V9, 2022 edition, pages 222 to 223; merge action: carried; file SHA-256 ad397fccbf21.
Ask about this section
The answer is drawn from this section and, when they fit, the other sections of its chapter. It quotes the text and names the section for each claim. Not legal advice.