header-logo header-logo

26 April 2024 / Andrew Francis
Issue: 8068 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Property , Contract
printer mail-detail

Beware the boilerplates!

169188
Andrew Francis on the application of three important principles advising upon the meaning & effect of legal documents
  • Covers Mackenzie v Cheung [2024], with lessons on interpretation and the dangers of boilerplate terms.
  • Notes important principles applicable to the interpretation of powers to vary rights at a future date.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on 17 January 2024 in Mackenzie v Cheung and another [2024] EWCA Civ 13, [2024] All ER (D) 64 (Jan) is an example of the application of three important principles when we are advising upon the meaning and effect of legal documents. First, for nearly 30 years the principles of construction of documents (set out on more than one occasion by the Supreme Court and its predecessors) require us not only to look at the language of the document, but also at the objective intentions of the parties and the context in which it is found. Second, previous decisions of the courts on words which are under scrutiny in the present case may not

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll