Via Mark Anderson, I learned of the opinion of the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, in Sycamore Bidco Ltd v. Breslin. I paid it just enough attention to see that it exemplifies an unhealthy English approach to contract drafting and contract interpretation. The contract at issue contained the following language: 5. Seller Warranties 5.1 The Sellers severally warrant to the Buyer … Read More
Today I received the following inquiry from Akiva Schonfeld, a lawyer at Technology Practice Group LLC: I recently graduated from law school and accepted a position at a law firm that specializes in drafting and negotiating contracts for technology transactions. My boss recommended that I read your book, A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting. I have found your book … Read More
Allonge? Do we have to? Here’s how Black’s Law Dictionary defines allonge, a noun: “A slip of paper sometimes attached to a negotiable instrument for the purpose of receiving further indorsements when the original paper is filled with indorsements.” (An indorsement serves to transfer or guarantee a negotiable instrument or to acknowledge payment.) Black’s gives 1859 as the date of … Read More
A reader sent me a link to this article on Lexology (free registration required). It’s about that old favorite, best endeavours, and it discusses an April 2012 case before the Court of Appeal, Jet2.com Limited v Blackpool Airport Limited (copy here), that involves a dispute over what a contract party was required to do to comply with a best endeavours provision. … Read More
How did duly ever escape my attention? Last week Bradley Clark sent the following tweet my way: @KonciseD Only 11:12 CST & I've already run into these two: "duly appointed" and "duly approved." — Bradley B. Clark (@bradleybclark) September 19, 2012 I realized that Bradley was giving me way too much credit—I’d never written about duly. So here goes. According to … Read More
I received the following inquiry from reader Andrew Sinclair: I couldn’t find any posts on the topic of whether to use “control”, “prevail”, or “govern” to resolve conflicting terms. I had a partner in China ask to change to change “prevail” to “control” when negotiating a contract. That suggested to me that the partner thought there would have been some … Read More
The word consideration features prominently in the traditional recital of consideration. You know: “NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, …” blah blah blah. The traditional recital of consideration is of course pointless (I revisited it in this 2011 post), but that’s not what this post is about. Instead, reader Chris Lemens brought to my attention the phrase as consideration. … Read More
The English case Ener-G Holdings PLC v Philip Hormell (discussed in this post) also had to consider what it means to say that notice can be served by “delivering it personally.” In that context, “personally” could relate to the person doing the delivering. After all, one says, “I delivered it personally,” meaning that the speaker was the one who delivered the … Read More
Steven Sholk, that indefatigable source of leads, has told me about yet another opinion dealing with a dispute over termination versus expiration. That’s a topic I’ve written about in a few blog posts. In the case at issue, Hamden v. Total Car Franchising Corp., 7:12-CV-00003, 2012 WL 3255598 (W.D. Va. Aug. 7, 2012) (PDF copy here), the court held, among other … Read More
For the heck of it, let’s go back to basics. Generally, no purpose is served by stating, in the introductory clause or elsewhere, that the parties intend to be legally bound. The approach under U.S. law is summarized by section 21 of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts, which states that “Neither real nor apparent intention that a promise be legally … Read More
