Unintended consequences

11th November 2015

The latest case on the interpretation of contracts to reach the Supreme Court has once again produced a difference in approach between a majority who gave precedence to the words the parties actually used, and a minority who preferred a more common-sense interpretation.

Click here to read more on the article.


This content is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/ or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by any member of Chambers or by Chambers as a whole.



Sign up to our newsletter mailing list for the latest news.