header-logo header-logo

Construction of deed

11 August 2011
Issue: 7478 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

LB RE Financing No. 3 Ltd v Excalibur Funding No 1 plc and others [2011] EWHC 2111 (Ch), [2011] All ER (D) 22 (Aug)

The court’s task when addressing issues of construction was to ascertain the meaning which the instrument would convey to a reasonable person having all the background knowledge which would reasonably be available to the audience to whom the instrument was addressed. Identification of the relevant audience was important, because it served to identify the range of background facts relevant to interpretation. A distinction had to be made between commercial absurdity and irrationality and apparent unfairness or one-sidedness.

The former might compel the court to conclude that something had to have gone wrong with the language, but it was no part of the court’s task to mend businessmen’s bargains. Commercial absurdity might require the court to depart from the apparently unambiguous natural meaning of a provision in an instrument. Questions of commercial commonsense falling short of absurdity might, however, enable the court to choose between genuinely alternative meanings of an ambiguous provision. The

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll