1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:03,640
Chapter 9 Contract 
Interpretation Contract 

2
00:00:03,640 --> 00:00:06,640
interpretation is a critical 
aspect of contract law that 

3
00:00:06,640 --> 00:00:09,320
determines how the terms of a 
contract are understood and 

4
00:00:09,320 --> 00:00:12,040
applied. 
The interpretation of contracts 

5
00:00:12,040 --> 00:00:14,960
is essential for resolving 
disputes, as it provides the 

6
00:00:14,960 --> 00:00:17,760
framework for understanding the 
rights and obligations of the 

7
00:00:17,760 --> 00:00:20,600
parties involved. 
This chapter delves into the 

8
00:00:20,600 --> 00:00:23,240
intricate principles and rules 
that govern contract 

9
00:00:23,240 --> 00:00:26,680
interpretation, exploring the 
tools and methods courts use to 

10
00:00:26,680 --> 00:00:30,240
interpret contractual language. 
It covers the plain meaning 

11
00:00:30,240 --> 00:00:33,320
rule, the parole evidence rule, 
and how courts address 

12
00:00:33,320 --> 00:00:35,960
ambiguities and contradictions 
in contracts. 

13
00:00:36,440 --> 00:00:39,760
Additionally, the chapter 
examines various interpretation 

14
00:00:39,760 --> 00:00:43,000
aids, including course of 
performance, course of dealing, 

15
00:00:43,160 --> 00:00:46,600
and usage of trade, which play a
significant role in interpreting

16
00:00:46,600 --> 00:00:51,360
contracts within specific 
industries or contexts. 1 Rules 

17
00:00:51,360 --> 00:00:54,800
of Interpretation The 
interpretation of contracts is 

18
00:00:54,800 --> 00:00:57,760
governed by a set of established
rules that aim to determine the 

19
00:00:57,760 --> 00:01:00,560
intent of the parties at the 
time the contract was formed. 

20
00:01:01,000 --> 00:01:03,520
These rules ensure that 
contracts are enforced in a 

21
00:01:03,520 --> 00:01:06,640
manner consistent with that 
intent, providing a fair and 

22
00:01:06,640 --> 00:01:09,000
predictable framework for 
resolving disputes. 

23
00:01:09,440 --> 00:01:12,400
The primary goal is to ascertain
the meaning of the contract 

24
00:01:12,400 --> 00:01:15,680
based on its language, context, 
and the circumstances 

25
00:01:15,680 --> 00:01:20,080
surrounding its formation. 1.1 
Objective theory of contracts 

26
00:01:20,640 --> 00:01:23,200
The objective theory of 
contracts is a foundational 

27
00:01:23,200 --> 00:01:25,440
principle and contract 
interpretation. 

28
00:01:25,920 --> 00:01:28,840
It posits that the intent of the
parties is determined not by 

29
00:01:28,840 --> 00:01:31,920
their subjective understanding 
or intentions, but by how a 

30
00:01:31,920 --> 00:01:34,680
reasonable person would 
interpret the contracts language

31
00:01:34,680 --> 00:01:37,320
in terms. 
This objective approach promotes

32
00:01:37,320 --> 00:01:40,400
consistency and fairness, 
ensuring that contracts are 

33
00:01:40,400 --> 00:01:42,880
interpreted based on what was 
communicated between the 

34
00:01:42,880 --> 00:01:45,160
parties, rather than undisclosed
intentions. 

35
00:01:45,640 --> 00:01:49,280
Key points. 
Focus on language The contracts 

36
00:01:49,280 --> 00:01:51,360
language is given primary 
importance. 

37
00:01:51,840 --> 00:01:55,080
Courts focus on the words used 
in the contract, interpreting 

38
00:01:55,080 --> 00:01:57,640
them as they would be understood
by a reasonable person in the 

39
00:01:57,640 --> 00:02:00,040
same situation as the 
contracting parties. 

40
00:02:00,480 --> 00:02:03,000
Context matters. 
While the plain language of the 

41
00:02:03,000 --> 00:02:06,560
contract is crucial, courts also
consider the context in which 

42
00:02:06,560 --> 00:02:09,520
the contract was formed, 
including the circumstances 

43
00:02:09,520 --> 00:02:12,040
surrounding the agreement and 
the conduct of the parties. 

44
00:02:12,560 --> 00:02:15,800
This context helps clarify 
ambiguous terms and ensures the 

45
00:02:15,800 --> 00:02:18,560
contract is interpreted in line 
with the party's likely 

46
00:02:18,560 --> 00:02:22,400
intentions. 
Example Suppose a contract 

47
00:02:22,400 --> 00:02:25,000
states that delivery must occur 
within 30 days. 

48
00:02:25,440 --> 00:02:28,840
If one party argues that days 
refers to business days while 

49
00:02:28,840 --> 00:02:31,960
the other party interprets it as
calendar days, the court would 

50
00:02:31,960 --> 00:02:35,400
apply the objective theory. 
A reasonable person would likely

51
00:02:35,400 --> 00:02:38,560
interpret 30 days as calendar 
days unless there is evidence 

52
00:02:38,560 --> 00:02:41,520
that both parties understood it 
to mean business days based on 

53
00:02:41,520 --> 00:02:43,880
their negotiations or industry 
practice. 

54
00:02:44,400 --> 00:02:47,440
Historical Background. 
The objective theory of 

55
00:02:47,440 --> 00:02:50,640
contracts has evolved from 
common law principles, which 

56
00:02:50,640 --> 00:02:53,320
traditionally emphasized the 
importance of a meeting of the 

57
00:02:53,320 --> 00:02:57,600
minds in contract formation. 
Overtime, courts shifted towards

58
00:02:57,600 --> 00:03:00,800
a more objective standard, 
recognizing that relying solely 

59
00:03:00,800 --> 00:03:03,760
on subjective intent could lead 
to uncertainty and unfair 

60
00:03:03,760 --> 00:03:06,520
outcomes. 
The modern approach balances the

61
00:03:06,520 --> 00:03:09,440
need for contractual certainty 
with fairness by focusing on the

62
00:03:09,440 --> 00:03:12,080
reasonable expectations created 
by the contracts. 

63
00:03:12,080 --> 00:03:17,160
Language and context application
in modern Law In contemporary 

64
00:03:17,160 --> 00:03:20,880
contract disputes, the objective
theory is applied across various

65
00:03:20,880 --> 00:03:23,640
jurisdictions, providing a 
consistent method for 

66
00:03:23,640 --> 00:03:27,080
interpreting contracts. 
It is particularly important in 

67
00:03:27,080 --> 00:03:29,840
cases where one party claims 
that the contract does not 

68
00:03:29,840 --> 00:03:33,680
reflect their actual intentions.
By focusing on the contracts 

69
00:03:33,680 --> 00:03:36,520
language and the reasonable 
interpretation of that language,

70
00:03:36,720 --> 00:03:39,600
courts avoid the pitfalls of 
subjective disputes and enforce 

71
00:03:39,600 --> 00:03:42,280
agreements based on what was 
actually agreed upon. 

72
00:03:42,760 --> 00:03:45,960
Plain meaning rule The plain 
meaning rule is a central 

73
00:03:45,960 --> 00:03:48,080
doctrine and contract 
interpretation. 

74
00:03:48,560 --> 00:03:51,160
It asserts that when the 
language of a contract is clear 

75
00:03:51,160 --> 00:03:54,400
and unambiguous, the courts will
enforce the contract according 

76
00:03:54,400 --> 00:03:57,800
to its plain, ordinary meaning. 
The rule is rooted in the 

77
00:03:57,800 --> 00:04:00,600
principle that the best evidence
of the party's intent is the 

78
00:04:00,600 --> 00:04:02,920
language they chose to use in 
the contract. 

79
00:04:03,400 --> 00:04:06,600
As such, the plain meaning rule 
limits the use of extrinsic 

80
00:04:06,600 --> 00:04:09,400
evidence, which refers to 
evidence outside the written 

81
00:04:09,400 --> 00:04:13,000
contract, such as prior 
negotiations, oral agreements, 

82
00:04:13,160 --> 00:04:15,800
or other communications that 
might contradict the written 

83
00:04:15,800 --> 00:04:17,600
terms. 
Key points. 

84
00:04:18,320 --> 00:04:21,800
Clear language prevails If the 
contracts language is clear and 

85
00:04:21,800 --> 00:04:24,840
unambiguous, Ports will 
interpret and enforce it based 

86
00:04:24,840 --> 00:04:28,520
on its ordinary plain meaning. 
This approach reinforces the 

87
00:04:28,520 --> 00:04:31,320
importance of clear drafting and
ensures that the party's 

88
00:04:31,320 --> 00:04:33,000
expressed intentions are 
honored. 

89
00:04:33,480 --> 00:04:36,680
No extrinsic evidence When the 
language of the contract is 

90
00:04:36,680 --> 00:04:40,200
unambiguous, Ports will not 
consider extrinsic evidence to 

91
00:04:40,200 --> 00:04:42,480
alter or add to the contracts 
terms. 

92
00:04:42,960 --> 00:04:45,920
This prevents parties from 
introducing outside evidence to 

93
00:04:45,920 --> 00:04:48,440
change the contract after it has
been executed. 

94
00:04:48,880 --> 00:04:53,440
Example Consider a contract that
states the contractor shall 

95
00:04:53,440 --> 00:04:55,880
complete the project by December
31st. 

96
00:04:56,360 --> 00:04:59,480
If this language is clear and 
unambiguous, the court will 

97
00:04:59,480 --> 00:05:03,520
enforce the deadline is December
31st, regardless of any external

98
00:05:03,520 --> 00:05:06,720
discussions or negotiations that
might suggest an alternative 

99
00:05:06,720 --> 00:05:09,440
interpretation. 
The plain meaning of December 

100
00:05:09,440 --> 00:05:12,600
31st is understood to be the 
final day of the year, and 

101
00:05:12,600 --> 00:05:15,720
unless the contract explicitly 
defines the term differently, 

102
00:05:15,840 --> 00:05:17,720
this interpretation will be 
applied. 

103
00:05:18,160 --> 00:05:22,240
Challenges contextual 
Interpretation While the plain 

104
00:05:22,240 --> 00:05:25,280
meaning rule emphasizes the 
importance of clear language, 

105
00:05:25,400 --> 00:05:28,360
disputes can arise when parties 
argue that the plain meaning of 

106
00:05:28,360 --> 00:05:31,240
a term differs based on the 
context in which it is used. 

107
00:05:31,760 --> 00:05:35,240
For example, industry specific 
language or technical terms 

108
00:05:35,240 --> 00:05:37,840
might have a plain meaning 
within that context that differs

109
00:05:37,840 --> 00:05:40,800
from their general use. 
Courts must then determine 

110
00:05:40,800 --> 00:05:44,200
whether the language is truly 
clear or if extrinsic evidence 

111
00:05:44,200 --> 00:05:47,040
should be allowed to clarify 
potential ambiguities. 

112
00:05:47,520 --> 00:05:50,960
Literal versus Intentional 
interpretation Another challenge

113
00:05:50,960 --> 00:05:54,240
involves balancing a literal 
interpretation of contract terms

114
00:05:54,240 --> 00:05:56,000
with the party's broader 
intentions. 

115
00:05:56,480 --> 00:05:59,800
For example, a contract might be
interpreted literally to the 

116
00:05:59,800 --> 00:06:02,800
detriment of the party's broader
goals if the language is taken 

117
00:06:02,800 --> 00:06:05,560
out of context. 
Courts sometimes face the 

118
00:06:05,560 --> 00:06:08,560
difficult task of deciding 
whether to adhere strictly to 

119
00:06:08,560 --> 00:06:11,360
the literal language or to 
consider the broader intent. 

120
00:06:11,840 --> 00:06:15,760
Judicial Interpretation Courts 
typically follow the plain 

121
00:06:15,760 --> 00:06:18,760
meaning rule to promote legal 
certainty and predictability in 

122
00:06:18,760 --> 00:06:22,520
contractual relationships. 
However, if the plain meaning 

123
00:06:22,520 --> 00:06:25,600
leads to an absurd or 
unreasonable result, courts may 

124
00:06:25,600 --> 00:06:28,600
look beyond the text to ensure 
the contract is interpreted in a

125
00:06:28,600 --> 00:06:31,000
way that aligns with common 
sense and fairness. 

126
00:06:31,440 --> 00:06:35,040
This exception, however, is 
applied sparingly to maintain 

127
00:06:35,040 --> 00:06:37,360
the integrity of the written 
word in contracts. 

128
00:06:37,840 --> 00:06:41,880
Implications for Drafting The 
plain meaning rule underscores 

129
00:06:41,880 --> 00:06:44,720
the importance of precise and 
clear language in contract 

130
00:06:44,720 --> 00:06:47,160
drafting. 
Legal professionals must 

131
00:06:47,160 --> 00:06:50,440
carefully choose words and 
phrases to avoid ambiguities and

132
00:06:50,440 --> 00:06:52,800
ensure that the contract 
reflects the party's true 

133
00:06:52,800 --> 00:06:55,520
intentions. 
Ambiguous terms or vague 

134
00:06:55,520 --> 00:06:58,560
language can lead to disputes 
and potentially unfavorable 

135
00:06:58,560 --> 00:07:04,200
judicial interpretations. 2 
Parole Evidence Rule The Parole 

136
00:07:04,200 --> 00:07:07,200
Evidence rule is a fundamental 
doctrine and contract law that 

137
00:07:07,200 --> 00:07:09,800
governs the admissibility of 
extrinsic evidence in 

138
00:07:09,800 --> 00:07:13,640
interpreting written contracts. 
It seems to uphold the integrity

139
00:07:13,640 --> 00:07:15,880
of written agreements by 
excluding prior or 

140
00:07:15,880 --> 00:07:19,080
contemporaneous oral or written 
statements that contradict or 

141
00:07:19,080 --> 00:07:20,840
add to the final written 
contract. 

142
00:07:21,320 --> 00:07:24,160
The rule is crucial in ensuring 
that the written contract is 

143
00:07:24,160 --> 00:07:26,400
treated at the definitive 
statement of the party's 

144
00:07:26,400 --> 00:07:29,320
agreement, thus preventing 
disputes over what was agreed 

145
00:07:29,320 --> 00:07:32,320
upon. 
Definition and Purpose The 

146
00:07:32,320 --> 00:07:35,440
parole evidence rule stipulates 
that when parties have entered 

147
00:07:35,440 --> 00:07:38,320
into a written contract intended
to be a complete and final 

148
00:07:38,320 --> 00:07:41,800
expression of their agreement. 
Extrinsic evidence, such as 

149
00:07:41,800 --> 00:07:45,600
prior contemporaneous oral 
agreements, written drafts, or 

150
00:07:45,600 --> 00:07:49,320
informal communications, is 
generally inadmissible to alter,

151
00:07:49,440 --> 00:07:52,520
contradict, or add to the terms 
of the written contract. 

152
00:07:53,000 --> 00:07:55,920
This rule is grounded in the 
idea that the written contract 

153
00:07:55,920 --> 00:07:58,960
represents the party's final 
understanding and should not be 

154
00:07:58,960 --> 00:08:01,880
undermined by external evidence 
that was not included in the 

155
00:08:01,880 --> 00:08:05,480
final document. 
Key points complete. 

156
00:08:05,480 --> 00:08:08,960
And final expression The parole 
evidence rule applies only to 

157
00:08:08,960 --> 00:08:11,800
contracts that are considered 
integrated, meaning they are 

158
00:08:11,800 --> 00:08:14,800
intended to be the complete and 
final expression of the party's 

159
00:08:14,800 --> 00:08:17,520
agreement. 
If a contract is integrated, 

160
00:08:17,680 --> 00:08:20,720
extrinsic evidence cannot be 
used to change its terms. 

161
00:08:21,200 --> 00:08:25,080
Exclusion of extrinsic evidence 
Under the parole evidence rule. 

162
00:08:25,080 --> 00:08:29,240
Extrinsic evidence, including 
prior oral agreements, emails, 

163
00:08:29,240 --> 00:08:32,600
or drafts, is generally excluded
from consideration if it 

164
00:08:32,600 --> 00:08:35,039
contradicts or adds to the 
written contract. 

165
00:08:35,520 --> 00:08:38,280
This exclusion helps prevent 
parties from claiming that the 

166
00:08:38,280 --> 00:08:41,480
final written contract does not 
fully capture their agreement. 

167
00:08:41,919 --> 00:08:45,240
Example. 
Imagine a written sales contract

168
00:08:45,240 --> 00:08:48,080
specifies that delivery is to 
occur on March 1st. 

169
00:08:48,560 --> 00:08:51,240
If the parties previously 
discussed the possibility of 

170
00:08:51,240 --> 00:08:54,720
delivery occurring sometime in 
March during negotiations, these

171
00:08:54,720 --> 00:08:57,800
prior oral statements would be 
inadmissible under the Parole 

172
00:08:57,800 --> 00:09:00,680
Evidence rule to alter the March
1st delivery date. 

173
00:09:01,160 --> 00:09:04,280
The written contracts clear 
language prevails and the court 

174
00:09:04,280 --> 00:09:06,200
would enforce the March 1st 
deadline. 

175
00:09:06,680 --> 00:09:10,400
Purpose and rationale The 
primary purpose of the Parole 

176
00:09:10,400 --> 00:09:13,640
Evidence Rule is to protect the 
finality and reliability of 

177
00:09:13,640 --> 00:09:17,040
written agreements. 
By excluding extrinsic evidence,

178
00:09:17,200 --> 00:09:19,760
the rule ensures that the 
written contract reflects the 

179
00:09:19,760 --> 00:09:22,640
true intentions of the parties 
at the time of execution, 

180
00:09:22,840 --> 00:09:25,760
reducing the risk of disputes 
over what was agreed upon. 

181
00:09:26,280 --> 00:09:29,360
It also promotes legal 
certainty, as parties can rely 

182
00:09:29,360 --> 00:09:31,920
on the written contract as the 
definitive record of their 

183
00:09:31,920 --> 00:09:35,760
agreement. 
Limitations The parole evidence 

184
00:09:35,760 --> 00:09:37,800
rule is not without its 
limitations. 

185
00:09:38,240 --> 00:09:41,400
It only applies to integrated 
contracts, meaning that if a 

186
00:09:41,400 --> 00:09:44,160
contract is not intended to be 
the final expression of the 

187
00:09:44,160 --> 00:09:47,080
party's agreement, extrinsic 
evidence may still be 

188
00:09:47,080 --> 00:09:49,920
admissible. 
Additionally, the rule does not 

189
00:09:49,920 --> 00:09:52,800
apply to certain types of 
extrinsic evidence, such as 

190
00:09:52,800 --> 00:09:56,360
evidence of fraud, the rest or 
mistake which can be introduced 

191
00:09:56,360 --> 00:09:58,800
to challenge the validity of the
contract itself. 

192
00:09:59,280 --> 00:10:02,720
Exceptions to the Parole 
Evidence Rule While the parole 

193
00:10:02,720 --> 00:10:05,280
evidence rule is designed to 
preserve the integrity of 

194
00:10:05,280 --> 00:10:08,280
written contracts, there are 
several notable exceptions where

195
00:10:08,280 --> 00:10:10,360
extrinsic evidence may be 
considered. 

196
00:10:10,800 --> 00:10:13,840
These exceptions acknowledge 
that in some cases, the written 

197
00:10:13,840 --> 00:10:16,920
contract may not fully capture 
the party's agreement or that 

198
00:10:16,920 --> 00:10:19,680
external factors may have 
influenced the formation of the 

199
00:10:19,680 --> 00:10:23,840
contract. 
One Ambiguity One of the most 

200
00:10:23,840 --> 00:10:26,640
common exceptions to the parole 
evidence rule is when the 

201
00:10:26,640 --> 00:10:30,520
contract language is ambiguous. 
If the terms of the contract are

202
00:10:30,520 --> 00:10:33,880
unclear or open to multiple 
interpretations, extrinsic 

203
00:10:33,880 --> 00:10:36,920
evidence may be admitted to 
clarify the party's intent and 

204
00:10:36,920 --> 00:10:41,320
resolve the ambiguity. 
Example A contract states 

205
00:10:41,440 --> 00:10:44,000
delivery shall be made on the 
first Monday of the month. 

206
00:10:44,520 --> 00:10:47,240
If there is a dispute about 
which month this refers to, 

207
00:10:47,400 --> 00:10:50,720
extrinsic evidence, such as 
prior communications or industry

208
00:10:50,720 --> 00:10:53,680
standards, may be admitted to 
clarify the intended delivery 

209
00:10:53,680 --> 00:10:56,160
month. 
For instance, if the party's 

210
00:10:56,160 --> 00:10:58,720
prior dealings show that they 
typically refer to the first 

211
00:10:58,720 --> 00:11:01,920
Monday of the month following 
the contract's execution, this 

212
00:11:01,920 --> 00:11:06,720
evidence can be used to resolve 
the ambiguity. 2 Fraud, duress, 

213
00:11:06,720 --> 00:11:10,560
or Mistake Extrinsic evidence is
admissible when there are claims

214
00:11:10,560 --> 00:11:13,960
of fraud, duress, or mistake in 
the formation of the contract. 

215
00:11:14,480 --> 00:11:17,160
If a party alleges that they 
were misled or coerced into 

216
00:11:17,160 --> 00:11:20,240
signing the contract or that a 
mistake was made in drafting the

217
00:11:20,240 --> 00:11:23,640
contract, evidence of these 
issues can be introduced even if

218
00:11:23,640 --> 00:11:25,320
it contradicts the written 
terms. 

219
00:11:25,760 --> 00:11:30,000
Example A party claims they were
misled into signing a contract 

220
00:11:30,000 --> 00:11:33,720
by fraudulent misrepresentation.
The evidence of the fraud would 

221
00:11:33,720 --> 00:11:37,000
be admissible to challenge the 
validity of the contract even if

222
00:11:37,000 --> 00:11:38,680
it contradicts the written 
terms. 

223
00:11:39,160 --> 00:11:42,720
For example, if a seller falsely
represented the quality of goods

224
00:11:42,720 --> 00:11:45,880
in an oral statement before the 
contract was signed, the buyer 

225
00:11:45,880 --> 00:11:48,800
could introduce this evidence to
argue that the contract should 

226
00:11:48,800 --> 00:11:53,880
be voided or reformed. 3 
Collateral Agreements Extrinsic 

227
00:11:53,880 --> 00:11:56,280
evidence may be admitted to 
prove the existence of a 

228
00:11:56,280 --> 00:11:59,160
separate collateral agreement 
that does not contradict the 

229
00:11:59,160 --> 00:12:02,280
main contract and was not 
intended to be integrated into 

230
00:12:02,280 --> 00:12:05,280
the written document. 
A collateral agreement is an 

231
00:12:05,280 --> 00:12:07,840
independent agreement that 
exists alongside the main 

232
00:12:07,840 --> 00:12:10,640
contract but is not addressed 
within the four corners of the 

233
00:12:10,640 --> 00:12:14,680
written document. 
Example If a contract for the 

234
00:12:14,680 --> 00:12:17,520
sale of goods includes an oral 
agreement about the provision of

235
00:12:17,520 --> 00:12:20,760
additional services and this 
agreement does not conflict with

236
00:12:20,760 --> 00:12:23,680
the written terms, evidence of 
the oral agreement may be 

237
00:12:23,680 --> 00:12:26,520
admissible. 
For instance, if the buyer and 

238
00:12:26,520 --> 00:12:28,840
seller agreed orally that the 
seller would provide 

239
00:12:28,840 --> 00:12:31,440
installation services in 
addition to the sale of the 

240
00:12:31,440 --> 00:12:34,400
goods and this agreement does 
not contradict the written 

241
00:12:34,400 --> 00:12:37,320
contract, evidence of this 
collateral agreement may be 

242
00:12:37,320 --> 00:12:42,400
introduced. 4 Condition 
precedent A condition precedent 

243
00:12:42,400 --> 00:12:45,040
is an event or action that must 
occur before a party's 

244
00:12:45,040 --> 00:12:47,640
obligation to perform under the 
contract arises. 

245
00:12:48,200 --> 00:12:50,880
Evidence of a condition 
precedent is admissible to show 

246
00:12:50,880 --> 00:12:53,960
that the contract was dependent 
on a certain condition, even if 

247
00:12:53,960 --> 00:12:57,240
this condition is not explicitly
stated in the written contract. 

248
00:12:57,680 --> 00:13:02,040
Example If a buyer's obligation 
to purchase goods was contingent

249
00:13:02,040 --> 00:13:04,960
upon securing financing, 
evidence of this condition 

250
00:13:04,960 --> 00:13:08,400
precedent can be introduced even
if it is not explicitly stated 

251
00:13:08,400 --> 00:13:11,840
in the written contract. 
For example, if the buyer can 

252
00:13:11,840 --> 00:13:14,200
show that both parties 
understood that the contract 

253
00:13:14,200 --> 00:13:17,120
would only be binding if the 
buyer secured a loan, this 

254
00:13:17,120 --> 00:13:20,120
evidence would be admissible to 
argue that the contract is not 

255
00:13:20,120 --> 00:13:24,720
enforceable if the loan was not 
obtained. 5 Illegality or 

256
00:13:24,720 --> 00:13:27,760
unconscionability. 
Extrinsic evidence may be 

257
00:13:27,760 --> 00:13:30,800
introduced to demonstrate that 
the contract or a specific term 

258
00:13:30,800 --> 00:13:34,640
is illegal, unconscionable, or 
otherwise unenforceable under 

259
00:13:34,640 --> 00:13:36,800
the law. 
Courts will not enforce a 

260
00:13:36,800 --> 00:13:40,160
contract that is illegal or 
against public policy, and they 

261
00:13:40,160 --> 00:13:43,040
may refuse to enforce terms that
are so one sided that they are 

262
00:13:43,040 --> 00:13:47,480
considered unconscionable. 
Example A party may present 

263
00:13:47,480 --> 00:13:50,440
evidence that a contract was 
signed under extreme duress, 

264
00:13:50,560 --> 00:13:53,000
rendering it unconscionable and 
unenforceable. 

265
00:13:53,480 --> 00:13:56,480
For instance, if one party was 
threatened with physical harm 

266
00:13:56,480 --> 00:13:59,080
unless they signed the contract,
this evidence would be 

267
00:13:59,080 --> 00:14:01,800
admissible to argue that the 
contract should be voided on the

268
00:14:01,800 --> 00:14:05,680
grounds of duress. 
Impact of exceptions These 

269
00:14:05,680 --> 00:14:08,240
exceptions to the parole 
evidence rule are crucial 

270
00:14:08,240 --> 00:14:11,120
because they allow courts to 
consider the broader context in 

271
00:14:11,120 --> 00:14:14,480
which a contract was formed. 
While the rule seeks to preserve

272
00:14:14,480 --> 00:14:17,280
the finality of written 
agreements, these exceptions 

273
00:14:17,280 --> 00:14:20,240
recognize that the written 
contract may not always capture 

274
00:14:20,240 --> 00:14:23,080
the full scope of the party's 
agreement of the circumstances 

275
00:14:23,080 --> 00:14:26,400
surrounding its formation. 
Integration Clauses. 

276
00:14:26,840 --> 00:14:30,560
Integration clauses, Also known 
as merger or entire agreement 

277
00:14:30,560 --> 00:14:33,920
clauses, are contractual 
provisions that explicitly state

278
00:14:33,920 --> 00:14:36,640
that the written contract 
represents the entire agreement 

279
00:14:36,640 --> 00:14:40,120
between the parties, superseding
all prior negotiations, 

280
00:14:40,200 --> 00:14:44,120
agreements, or understandings. 
The presence of an integration 

281
00:14:44,120 --> 00:14:46,640
clause strengthens the 
application of the parole 

282
00:14:46,640 --> 00:14:50,000
evidence rule as it signals the 
party's intent for the written 

283
00:14:50,000 --> 00:14:52,800
contract to be the final and 
complete expression of their 

284
00:14:52,800 --> 00:14:54,680
agreement. 
Key points. 

285
00:14:55,360 --> 00:14:58,640
Effective Integration Clauses 
When a contract includes an 

286
00:14:58,640 --> 00:15:02,200
integration clause, courts are 
more likely to exclude extrinsic

287
00:15:02,200 --> 00:15:04,280
evidence under the parole 
evidence rule. 

288
00:15:04,720 --> 00:15:07,760
The integration clause indicates
that the parties intended the 

289
00:15:07,760 --> 00:15:10,640
written contract to be the sole 
and definitive statement of 

290
00:15:10,640 --> 00:15:13,400
their agreement, making it 
difficult for one party to 

291
00:15:13,400 --> 00:15:16,720
introduce evidence of prior 
contemporaneous agreements that 

292
00:15:16,720 --> 00:15:20,080
contradict the written terms. 
Drafting Considerations. 

293
00:15:20,160 --> 00:15:23,320
Integration clauses should be 
carefully drafted to ensure they

294
00:15:23,320 --> 00:15:25,920
accurately reflect the party's 
intent to have the written 

295
00:15:25,920 --> 00:15:28,520
contract serve as the final and 
complete agreement. 

296
00:15:28,960 --> 00:15:31,960
If the parties wish to include 
certain collateral agreements or

297
00:15:31,960 --> 00:15:35,000
conditions, they should ensure 
these are explicitly addressed 

298
00:15:35,000 --> 00:15:37,600
in the written contract or 
excluded from the scope of the 

299
00:15:37,600 --> 00:15:42,000
integration clause. 
Example A contract for the sale 

300
00:15:42,000 --> 00:15:44,680
of a business includes an 
integration clause stating that 

301
00:15:44,680 --> 00:15:47,520
this agreement constitutes the 
entire agreement between the 

302
00:15:47,520 --> 00:15:51,240
parties and supersedes all prior
discussions, agreements and 

303
00:15:51,240 --> 00:15:53,720
understandings, whether oral or 
written. 

304
00:15:54,200 --> 00:15:56,440
This clause would make it 
difficult for a party to 

305
00:15:56,440 --> 00:16:00,040
introduce extrinsic evidence of 
prior negotiations to alter the 

306
00:16:00,040 --> 00:16:04,160
terms of the written contract. 
For example, if the buyer claims

307
00:16:04,160 --> 00:16:06,840
that the seller made an oral 
promise to provide additional 

308
00:16:06,840 --> 00:16:10,000
training after the sale, the 
integration clause would likely 

309
00:16:10,000 --> 00:16:12,760
prevent the buyer from 
introducing this evidence, as 

310
00:16:12,760 --> 00:16:15,760
the written contract is deemed 
to represent the full agreement.

311
00:16:16,200 --> 00:16:19,840
Judicial interpretation. 
Courts generally uphold 

312
00:16:19,840 --> 00:16:23,200
integration clauses as a clear 
indication of the party's intent

313
00:16:23,200 --> 00:16:25,760
to finalize their agreement in 
the written contract. 

314
00:16:26,280 --> 00:16:29,280
However, courts may still 
consider extrinsic evidence in 

315
00:16:29,280 --> 00:16:32,440
cases where the integration 
clause is ambiguous or where the

316
00:16:32,440 --> 00:16:35,040
exceptions to the parole 
evidence rule apply. 

317
00:16:35,600 --> 00:16:39,200
For instance, if the integration
clause itself is unclear or if 

318
00:16:39,200 --> 00:16:42,000
there's evidence of fraud or 
mistake, the court may allow 

319
00:16:42,000 --> 00:16:45,320
extrinsic evidence to clarify 
the party's true intentions. 

320
00:16:45,800 --> 00:16:50,040
Impact on contractual disputes 
Integration clauses play a 

321
00:16:50,040 --> 00:16:53,120
significant role in resolving 
contractual disputes by 

322
00:16:53,120 --> 00:16:56,080
providing a clear basis for 
determining whether extrinsic 

323
00:16:56,080 --> 00:16:59,240
evidence should be considered. 
They help to streamline the 

324
00:16:59,240 --> 00:17:02,040
interpretation process by 
focusing the court's attention 

325
00:17:02,040 --> 00:17:04,599
on the written contract, 
reducing the likelihood of 

326
00:17:04,599 --> 00:17:07,240
protracted disputes over what 
was agreed upon during 

327
00:17:07,240 --> 00:17:10,240
negotiations. 
Best Practices for Drafting 

328
00:17:10,240 --> 00:17:14,160
Integration Clauses When 
drafting integration clauses, 

329
00:17:14,319 --> 00:17:17,000
parties should be explicit about
the scope of the clause and 

330
00:17:17,000 --> 00:17:19,960
consider whether any collateral 
agreements or conditions should 

331
00:17:19,960 --> 00:17:22,160
be incorporated into the written
contract. 

332
00:17:22,599 --> 00:17:25,119
Clarity in the integration 
clause helps prevent 

333
00:17:25,119 --> 00:17:27,880
misunderstandings and ensures 
that the written contract 

334
00:17:27,880 --> 00:17:32,560
accurately reflects the party's 
full agreement. 3 Ambiguities 

335
00:17:32,560 --> 00:17:36,280
and Contradictions in Contract 
Law Contracts often contain 

336
00:17:36,280 --> 00:17:39,280
language that is ambiguous or 
contradictory, leading to 

337
00:17:39,280 --> 00:17:41,240
disputes over their 
interpretation. 

338
00:17:41,800 --> 00:17:44,960
Courts have developed specific 
rules and principles to address 

339
00:17:44,960 --> 00:17:48,080
these issues, ensuring that 
contracts are interpreted in a 

340
00:17:48,080 --> 00:17:50,880
manner that reflects the party's
true intent while maintaining 

341
00:17:50,880 --> 00:17:54,320
fairness and consistency. 
Understanding how to navigate 

342
00:17:54,320 --> 00:17:57,120
ambiguities and contradictions 
is essential for legal 

343
00:17:57,120 --> 00:18:00,320
professionals, as these issues 
can significantly impact the 

344
00:18:00,320 --> 00:18:03,080
enforcement of contractual 
rights and obligations. 

345
00:18:03,560 --> 00:18:07,640
Types of Ambiguities Ambiguities
and contracts can arise in 

346
00:18:07,640 --> 00:18:10,480
several forms, each requiring 
different approaches to 

347
00:18:10,480 --> 00:18:13,200
interpretation. 
Recognizing the type of 

348
00:18:13,200 --> 00:18:16,560
ambiguity is the first step in 
resolving it, as it dictates the

349
00:18:16,560 --> 00:18:18,920
methods and principles that the 
court will apply. 

350
00:18:19,400 --> 00:18:24,360
One Patent ambiguity a patent 
ambiguity is an obvious, 

351
00:18:24,520 --> 00:18:27,080
apparent ambiguity on the face 
of the contract. 

352
00:18:27,560 --> 00:18:30,480
This type of ambiguity is clear 
from the plain language of the 

353
00:18:30,480 --> 00:18:34,160
contract and does not require 
external evidence to identify. 

354
00:18:34,680 --> 00:18:37,520
Patent ambiguities are typically
evident in the wording of the 

355
00:18:37,520 --> 00:18:40,760
contract itself, where the 
language used is unclear or 

356
00:18:40,760 --> 00:18:44,960
contradictory. 
Example a contract states that 

357
00:18:44,960 --> 00:18:48,520
delivery is due on April 15th, 
but it is unclear whether this 

358
00:18:48,520 --> 00:18:50,800
refers to the current year or 
the following year. 

359
00:18:51,240 --> 00:18:54,640
The ambiguity is apparent from 
the contract's language and the 

360
00:18:54,640 --> 00:18:56,880
court must resolve it through 
interpretation. 

361
00:18:57,400 --> 00:19:00,040
The resolution may involve 
looking at the contract as a 

362
00:19:00,040 --> 00:19:02,600
whole to determine the most 
logical or reasonable 

363
00:19:02,600 --> 00:19:06,040
interpretation, considering 
factors such as the context in 

364
00:19:06,040 --> 00:19:08,720
which the contract was made. 
In the usual practices in 

365
00:19:08,720 --> 00:19:13,640
similar transactions approach to
resolution, courts typically 

366
00:19:13,640 --> 00:19:16,880
resolve patent ambiguities by 
interpreting the contract as a 

367
00:19:16,880 --> 00:19:19,960
whole, giving effect to all 
provisions, and considering the 

368
00:19:19,960 --> 00:19:23,520
contracts overall purpose. 
The goal is to arrive at an 

369
00:19:23,520 --> 00:19:26,560
interpretation that is logical 
and consistent with the party's 

370
00:19:26,560 --> 00:19:29,400
intent as inferred from the 
contracts language and 

371
00:19:29,400 --> 00:19:32,560
structure. 
Two latent ambiguity. 

372
00:19:33,320 --> 00:19:36,080
A latent ambiguity is not 
immediately apparent from the 

373
00:19:36,080 --> 00:19:38,560
language of the contract, but 
becomes evident when the 

374
00:19:38,560 --> 00:19:40,360
contract is applied to the 
facts. 

375
00:19:40,840 --> 00:19:44,200
This type of ambiguity often 
requires extrinsic evidence to 

376
00:19:44,200 --> 00:19:47,840
clarify because the language, 
while seemingly clear, leads to 

377
00:19:47,840 --> 00:19:50,360
multiple interpretations when 
applied to specific 

378
00:19:50,360 --> 00:19:54,600
circumstances. 
Example, A contract refers to 

379
00:19:54,600 --> 00:19:57,920
the shipment of 500 units, but 
it is later discovered that the 

380
00:19:57,920 --> 00:19:59,920
parties had different 
understandings of what 

381
00:19:59,920 --> 00:20:03,240
constitutes a unit. 
The ambiguity only becomes 

382
00:20:03,240 --> 00:20:05,760
apparent when the contract is 
applied to the specific 

383
00:20:05,760 --> 00:20:09,000
circumstances, such as when one 
party believes that a unit 

384
00:20:09,000 --> 00:20:11,760
refers to a complete product 
while the other believes it 

385
00:20:11,760 --> 00:20:13,640
refers to a component of the 
product. 

386
00:20:14,120 --> 00:20:18,160
Approach to resolution. 
To resolve latent ambiguities, 

387
00:20:18,320 --> 00:20:20,280
courts may admit extrinsic 
evidence. 

388
00:20:20,520 --> 00:20:23,440
Such as the party's prior 
negotiations, industry 

389
00:20:23,440 --> 00:20:26,680
standards, or previous dealings.
To clarify the meaning of the 

390
00:20:26,680 --> 00:20:29,680
ambiguous term. 
The court's goal is to interpret

391
00:20:29,680 --> 00:20:31,920
the contract in a way that 
aligns with the party's 

392
00:20:31,920 --> 00:20:34,320
intentions at the time of 
contract formation. 

393
00:20:34,480 --> 00:20:36,960
Ensuring that the contract is 
enforced in a manner that 

394
00:20:36,960 --> 00:20:40,400
reflects what the parties 
actually agreed to impact on 

395
00:20:40,400 --> 00:20:44,640
contractual relationships. 
Ambiguities, whether patent or 

396
00:20:44,640 --> 00:20:47,920
latent, can lead to significant 
disputes between contracting 

397
00:20:47,920 --> 00:20:50,200
parties, especially when the 
stakes are high. 

398
00:20:50,680 --> 00:20:53,400
The resolution of these 
ambiguities can determine the 

399
00:20:53,400 --> 00:20:56,560
outcome of legal disputes and 
the enforcement of contractual 

400
00:20:56,560 --> 00:20:59,480
obligations. 
Legal professionals must be 

401
00:20:59,480 --> 00:21:02,240
vigilant in identifying 
potential ambiguities during 

402
00:21:02,240 --> 00:21:05,640
contract drafting to minimize 
the risk of disputes and ensure 

403
00:21:05,640 --> 00:21:08,400
that the contract language 
accurately reflects the party's 

404
00:21:08,400 --> 00:21:12,160
intentions. 
Resolving ambiguities courts use

405
00:21:12,160 --> 00:21:14,160
various tools and principles to 
resolve.