Write exactly what you mean
Language: English Series: Construction News ; (6962) 13 April 2006, 48(1)Publication details: 2006Subject(s): Summary: Reports the facts of, and comments upon, Proforce Recruit Ltd v The Rugby Group Ltd ([2006] EWCA Civ 69, unreported), which revolved around the definition of the term preferred supplier status. The CA held that when construing a contract, a court has to consider the background to the transaction, including pre-contract negotiations, as well as the literal meaning of the words. Therefore, although the term had no generally accepted meaning, and was not defined in the contract, P could produce evidence from the negotiations to support its view of the meaning of the term. The implications are that those preparing contracts must include definitions of any expressions that do not have precise and generally accepted meanings.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L133210 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 133210-1001 |
Reports the facts of, and comments upon, Proforce Recruit Ltd v The Rugby Group Ltd ([2006] EWCA Civ 69, unreported), which revolved around the definition of the term preferred supplier status. The CA held that when construing a contract, a court has to consider the background to the transaction, including pre-contract negotiations, as well as the literal meaning of the words. Therefore, although the term had no generally accepted meaning, and was not defined in the contract, P could produce evidence from the negotiations to support its view of the meaning of the term. The implications are that those preparing contracts must include definitions of any expressions that do not have precise and generally accepted meanings.