Exemption clauses are often used by large companies for planning, liability protection, and controlling variables that are otherwise uncontrolled. Although this is an important feature of contracts, the fact that they are used on such a scale that they are treated with suspicion by the courts means that the terms are therefore the provisions of the contract that the parties have agreed to and that oblige them to perform. The terms of the contract specify the nature and details of the performance due by the contracting parties, i.e. the nature and description of the goods or services to be provided, as well as the nature, time and place of performance. Not all terms are necessarily contained in the written contract itself. The Terms include both the provisions that the parties include in their contract and the provisions contained by law. Contracts do not have to fall into a specific category, but some traditional types are recognized, as well as their own rules, conditions and consequences. There is therefore a clear gap between theory and practice in this area of law, although case law has been expressed in favour of a more liberal approach to interpretation. The oft-quoted statement that « the rule of interpretation is not to establish what the intention of the parties was, but what is meant by the language used in the contract, that is, what their intention was, as expressed in the contract », was treated with great caution. The principle tends to obscure the consensus basis of South African contract law, they say, and is not rigid, but subject to restrictions. The terms used in a contract cannot be considered independently of the factual matrix in which they appear when the intention of the parties must be established. Although the first step in interpreting a contract is still to determine the ordinary and grammatical meaning of the words used, « it must be recognized that very few words have a single meaning, and even the `ordinary` meaning of a word can vary or be nuanced by the actual context in which it is used. » [136] A court should therefore be aware of the different possible meanings of words and not assume that a particular meaning prevails. It should also take into account the nature and purpose of the contract and the context of the terms of the contract as a whole.

Express clauses in standardised contracts are treated differently from explicit clauses negotiated by the parties, because a party presenting a standardised contract to another party for signature is expected to alert them to unexpected clauses, otherwise the signatory may not be bound. We often repeat these rules because the so-called « golden rule » is dead and the context and purpose of interpreting a contract is equal to the ordinary sense. The main rights and obligations arising from a particular contract are those whose parts are expressly or implicitly agreed, as well as those implied by law. On the other hand, there are secondary rights and obligations (such as the obligation to pay damages and the obligation to return services received before termination) that arise after a breach of contract. It is not necessary for the parties to agree on special rights or obligations that are not essential to their respective contracts (essentialia); All obligations concerning the nature, time or place of performance are regulated by law and implicit once the parties have concluded their contract (naturalia). For example, if Sa Roj agreed to sell his car to Bosie for R100,000, all rights and obligations of both are regulated by law. Sa Roj is required to deliver the car to Bosie at Bosie`s request and Bosie is required to pay Sa Roj R100,000 once Bosie has agreed to deliver the car. Examples of modal clauses are ownership contracts, restrictive covenants and negative easements with registration. They are usually bound by the contract. While grammatical meaning is the starting point of interpretation, words necessarily depend on the contract as a whole for their meaning. The wording of the treaty as a whole must include the meaning of the various words: « It is, in my opinion, an undignified and misleading exercise to repeat a word in a document, to determine its most common or ordinary meaning, and then to try to interpret the document in the light of the meaning thus ascribed to that word. » [118] [119] The next step is therefore to interpret the wording of a contract in the context of the other provisions of the document as a whole, that is, the textual context. This is done in order to give effect to the contract, not to make it ineffective.

Words must be understood in their extended context: one can refer to one of many « ordinary » meanings or to an unusual or technical meaning. The rule of proof of pardon does not apply when the court is considering whether the parties intended to make an exclusive factum[109] and where it is clear that a written document was not intended to do so; In fact, the rule only applies to written contracts and only comes into play when everyone is convinced that a contract actually exists. Moreover, this rule does not apply if the document in question is only part of the contract or if the contract is partly written and partly oral, which amounts to asserting that the document was not intended to form an integral part of the contract, as it should be. It must apply to the contract as a whole. The rule is also not applicable if: A right of first refusal is a type of preferential right to acquire « at a fixed price or at a price at which the grantor is willing to sell ». [34] It is granted to a prospective buyer by a potential seller to give him a right of first refusal if the prospective seller decides to sell. A right of first refusal must satisfy all the requirements of contracts in general. The preemptor`s ability to sell the item in question is limited. If the grantor fails to comply with its obligation to offer the tangible property to the holder, the security remedy is a prohibition on preventing the sale to third parties. However, it is not certain that a claim by the holder of a certain advantage will be successful. Whether or not a clause is implied depends on the circumstances of each case. A general question concerns the impact of the reduction of a contract on the written form.

It has been said that an entire contractual term does not preclude the existence of an implied clause; This appears to be the case even though a law requires the terms of the contract to be in writing. Another issue was the standard of proof that must be met. The Appeal Division left this question unanswered after noting that there are two lines of authority when it comes to proving implied contracts. While none purports to resolve the problem, more judicial decisions follow the stricter test that there can be no reasonable interpretation other than that the parties intended and did enter into contracts on the terms claimed rather than following the less demanding « most plausible probable conclusion » test. A civil obligation, most often in contracts, is a legal obligation that is enforceable by a right of action, so that if the obligation is not performed, the creditor can sue the debtor for infringement. [43] In a simple and unconditional auction, the bidder is deemed to have submitted the bid. In the case of a reserved auction, the potential buyer shall be deemed to have submitted the bid; In the case of an unreserved auction, the auctioneer is deemed to have submitted the tender.

Devenez membre de Copywriting Pratique !

Si vous souhaitez :

  • Recevoir chaque nouvel article du blog directement dans votre boîte mail (si vous le souhaitez),
  • Avoir accès à des générateurs en ligne inédits (générateur de slogans, de noms de marques, d'accroches, un dico des synonymes avec une mise en situation, un formateur d'emails et même le fameux calculateur du Sympathomètre d'un texte),
  • Un guide qui vous explique comment trouver plus de 354 millions d’images gratuites et libres de droits...

Pour vous inscrire et avoir accès à tout ça, c'est facile : Indiquez votre prénom et votre email dans le formulaire ci-dessous :