Deck 11: Interpretation

Question 1

Which of the following is not one of the principles regarding interpretation set out by Lord Hoffmann in Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society?

A) The matrix of fact does not include pre-contractual negotiations and the parties' declarations of subjective intent.
B) A reasonable person's interpretation of the meaning of a document is to be distinguished from the objective meaning of the words used in the document.
C) Words in a contract should not be given their natural and ordinary meaning.
D) None of the options provided is correct.

Answer 1

C

Question 2

Which of the following are criticisms of Lord Hoffmann's approach to interpretation in cases such as Investors Compensation Scheme and Chartbrook? Please select all that apply.

A) The modern approach blurs the boundary between interpretation and rectification.
B) The modern approach undermines commercial certainty.
C) The modern approach makes litigation more expensive.
D) The modern approach is too rigid and leads to harsh results.

Answer 2

A,B,C

Question 3

A key difference between pre-contractual negotiations and post-contractual conduct is that the former is excluded from the scope of the 'factual matrix' whereas the latter is not.

Answer 3

False

Question 4

Following Arnold v Britton, it is unlikely that the courts will refuse to give effect to unambiguous contractual language simply because its meaning does not accord with commercial common sense.

Question 5

How has Lord Hoffmann's statement in Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd that there is no limit to the amount of correction a court is allowed to make in respect of a contract been undermined by the Supreme Court judgment in Arnold v Britton?

A) The importance of the requirement of ambiguity was emphasised by Lord Neuberger in Arnold.
B) The judges in Arnold did not cite Lord Hoffmann in their speeches.
C) Chartbrook was set aside as bad law by the Supreme Court in Arnold.
D) None of the options provided is correct.

Question 6

It is possible for a court to order a narrowing of the scope of the 'factual matrix' in order to prevent third parties to a contract from being unfairly prejudiced.