From context to text in contractual interpretation: Is there really a problem with the plain meaning rule?
Much of the contemporary scholarship on contractual interpretation is staunchly against a textual analysis, by which a court can only depart from the plain meaning of a contract exceptionally. It is therefore no surprise that scholars have reacted negatively to the spate of recent cases where the En...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2150 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4102/viewcontent/ContextTextContractualInterpretation_2016.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | Much of the contemporary scholarship on contractual interpretation is staunchly against a textual analysis, by which a court can only depart from the plain meaning of a contract exceptionally. It is therefore no surprise that scholars have reacted negatively to the spate of recent cases where the English courts have re-emphasized the plain meaning of the text in contractual interpretation. Yet one cannot help but wonder whether a textual analysis is really so problematic when courts across the common law world have re-embraced it. Drawing from both theoretical and comparative perspectives, this paper suggests that a focus on the text in contractual interpretation, and the corresponding application of the plain meaning rule, is to be welcomed and not scorned. |
|---|