What are the principles of contract interpretation under Admiralty Law?

Under Admiralty Law, contract interpretation is guided by several important principles. Generally, contracts are to be interpreted in accordance with plain language, giving words their common and ordinary meaning. If the language of a contract is not clear and does not have a plain meaning, then ambiguity in the language should be construed against the drafter of the contract. The rule of contra proferentem also applies in Admiralty Law. This rule is used to protect those who are weak in the bargaining power or those who lack skill in drafting language. If the language of the contract is open to more than one interpretation, then the interpretation most favorable to the weaker party will be preferred. The parol evidence rule also applies in Admiralty Law. This rule prohibits parties from submitting evidence outside of the contract and requires that contract interpretation focus on the four corners of the contract. In other words, extrinsic evidence such as oral statements or emails cannot be used to interpret the language of the contract. Finally, the objective theory of contracts is used as a principle of contract interpretation in Admiralty Law. The objective theory requires that the court look to the parties’ objective behavior, rather than their subjective intent, in order to determine their contractual duties. If the court finds that both parties understood and acted in a way that aligned with the expectations of the contract, then the contract will be enforced. Overall, these principles provide guidance to courts and litigants so that contractual obligations can be interpreted and enforced in Admiralty Law in Washington.

What are the principles of contract interpretation under Admiralty Law?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts