Implied terms in fact and evidence of prior negotiations: an exploration
View / Open Files
Authors
O'Sullivan, Janet
Journal Title
The Law Quarterly Review
ISSN
0023-933X
Publisher
Sweet and Maxwell
Type
Article
This Version
AM
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
O'Sullivan, J. Implied terms in fact and evidence of prior negotiations: an exploration. The Law Quarterly Review https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.85719
Abstract
THIS paper explores a controversy that arises from the decision of the Supreme Court in Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd (“Marks & Spencer”), in which Lord Neuberger (with whom Lord Sumption and Lord Hodge agreed) rejected Lord Hoffmann’s approach to implied terms in fact, set out in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd (“Belize”), that the process of implying terms in fact is an aspect of interpretation. For Lord Neuberger, this assimilation of interpretation and implication “could obscure the fact that construing the words used and implying additional words are different processes governed by different rules”.
Embargo Lift Date
2025-06-22
Identifiers
This record's DOI: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.85719
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/338310
Statistics
Total file downloads (since January 2020). For more information on metrics see the
IRUS guide.