Publication Type

Blog Post

Publication Date

6-2012

Abstract

There is an ongoing legal debate concerning the test governing the implication of terms in fact, prompted in no small measure by Lord Hoffmann’s influential speech in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom. In Belize, Lord Hoffmann famously said that the question for a court considering whether a term should be implied is ‘whether such a [term] would spell out in express words what the instrument, read against the relevant background, would reasonably be understood to mean’. This has generally been regarded by judges3 and academics4 as subsuming the implication of terms within the broader rubric of ‘interpretation’. The consequence is that the ‘reasonable person’ test that underpins contractual interpretation now applies to determine whether a term should be implied.

Keywords

Contract, Contractual terms, Admissibility of evidence

Discipline

Asian Studies | Law

Research Areas

Commercial Law

Publication

Singapore Law Watch Commentaries

Volume

2012

First Page

1

Last Page

6

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Additional URL

http://www.singaporelaw.sg/sglaw/singapore-law-watch/commentaries

Comments

Archived on LawNet

Share

COinS