Longmore LJ discussed the construction of a contract: ‘(i) the aim of the exercise is to ascertain the meaning of the relevant contractual language in the context of the document and against the background to the document. The object of the enquiry is not necessarily to probe the ‘real’ intention of the parties, but to ascertain what the language they used in the document would signify to a properly informed observer; and . .
(iv) a commercial document must be interpreted so as to make business common sense within its context. But if a detailed semantic and syntactical analysis of a word in a commercial contract is going to lead to a conclusion that flouts business common sense, it must be made to yield to business common sense. Longmore LJ then referred to the comments of Lord Diplock in Antaios which I have quoted above.’
Judges:
May LJ, Longmore LJ, Jacob LJ
Citations:
[2005] EWCA Civ 1586, [2006] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 129, [2006] 1 All ER (Comm) 375, [2006] 1 CLC 648
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Absalom v TCRU Ltd ComC 2005
. .
Cited by:
Cited – Reilly v National Insurance and Guarantee Corporation Ltd CA 19-Dec-2008
The claimant sold fire extinguishers. Three failed, resulting in damage to the purchaser’s properties. His insurers refused to pay an indemnity saying that the failure was the failure of a piece of machinery (the switchgear) and was not covered by . .
Cited – Margerison v Bates and Another ChD 30-May-2008
The court considered the construction of a restrictive covenant after the disappearance of the covenantee. The covenant required no additional building without the consent of the covenantee, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. The term . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Insurance
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279046
