header-logo header-logo

10 August 2017 / Nikki Edwards
Issue: 7759 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Some clarity on contracts

A recent Supreme Court case offers some valuable guidance on contractual interpretation, as Nikki Edwards explains

  • Wood v Capita Insurance Services Ltd clarifies the courts’ approach to contractual interpretation

Earlier this year the Supreme Court handed down judgment in Wood v Capita Insurance Services Ltd [2017] UKSC 24, [2017] All ER (D) 182 (Mar) a case which clarified the approach of the English courts to contractual interpretation and emphasised that the recent history of the common law of contractual interpretation is one of continuity rather than change. This article considers the perceived inconsistency prior to Wood and the guidance for the legal profession which was confirmed in this case.

The need for clarification

Wood concerned the interpretation of an indemnity clause in a sale and purchase agreement. The High Court decided the preliminary issue of the interpretation of the indemnity clause in favour of the appellant. This decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal.

In the Supreme Court, the appellant sought to argue that the Court of Appeal had fallen into

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll