S 3 A - interpretation

S 3 A - interpretation - possible meanings, the one that...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
S 3 A – Interpretation Construing – interpreting the contract 1 Strict (plain meaning) approach – restricts interpretation to the ordinary dictionary meaning of a word 2 Liberal approach – looks to the intent of the parties and surrounding circumstances and tends to minimize, but not ignore, the importance of the words actually used A court will look outside the contract to the surrounding circumstances as a means of clearing up ambiguities. Courts begin with the dictionary definitions of words used, then examines their meaning the context of the contract and surrounding circumstances. Special usage of words in particular trades or technical language in contracts can be construed as having the technical definition. Contra proferentum - Courts construe words most strictly against the party who has suggested them, in order to prevent him from being able to select, among two or more
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: possible meanings, the one that turns out to be to his advantage. Parol evidence rule prevents a party from adding a term previously agreed upon in negotiations but not included in the final written contract, (parol extrinsic to, outside the contract) Implied term not expressly included by the parties in the agreement but which, as reasonable people, they would have included had they thought about it 1 Courts will imply terms to make contract effect, if not the fair expectations of a party would be defeated (Moorcock case) 2 Courts will not imply a terms that is contrary to the expressed intent of the agreement. 3 Courts will not go further than is necessary and will not make a new contract for the parties....
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online