3. are force majeure clauses exclusion clauses?

in order to differentiate an exclusion or limitation clause from a force majeure clause we must first define 
exactly what we mean by exclusion clauses and examine their effect on the contractual relations of the 
parties. we might then usefully compare the operation of exception clauses to that of force majeure clauses.
a tripartite distinction between different types of clause was as follows: " protective conditions are three
distinct types: first, those which limit or reduce what would otherwise be the defendant’s duty; second, 
those which exclude the defendant’s liability for breach of specified aspects of that duty, and third, those 
which limit the extent to which the defendant is bound to indemnify the plaintiff in respect of the consequences 
of breaches of that duty." the difference between the first two categories is said to be this: in the first case
there is no breach of contract since there is no obligation to perform in the circumstances which have 
arisen, whilst in the second case there is a breach but the liability to pay damages in respect of it has 
been removed.
force majeure clauses, it seems, go to limit the extent of the obligation assumed by the promisor. they do not 
operate so as to shield a promisor from liability for a breach of contract. a force majeure clause will ensure 
that non-performance is no breach because no performance was due in the circumstances that have occurred.