This trend explains that certain awards have admitted, albeit in exceptional cases, the application of rebus sic stantibus. Thus, an international award, while referring to Swiss law, which admits under severe conditions the revision of contracts, decided that these conditions were to be applied in a more flexible manner in respect of international contracts.25 Another previous award did not exclude the principle of rebus sic stantibus, however, stating that its application should be limited to cases where constraining reasons justify it, taking into account not only the fundamental character of the changes in circumstances which are invoked, but equally the particular type of contract involved, the requirements of fairness and all the circumstances of the case.
My last example will be the obligation for a creditor to minimise the damage he suffers because of the non-fulfilment by the debtor of his own commitments. This obligation, generally admitted, as far as I know, in Common Law, is not so largely and clearly consecrated in Civil Law.
Now, a number of international awards have applied it as a general principle of international trade, not referring in particular to a Common Law system.26 Moreover, the principle may be combined with the obligation to renegotiate the contract in good faith.27
25 ICC Award, Case No 1512 /71 , 101 Clunet 902 (1974); 2748/74, 102 Clunet 905 (1974).
26 ICC Award, Case Nos 2103/72, 101 Clunet 902 (1974); 2748/74, 102 Clunet 905 (1975); 2291/75, 103 Clunet 989 (1976) ; 2520/75, 103 Clunet 992 (1976) .
27 ICC Award, Case No 2748/74, 102 Clunet 905 (1975).