1
حقوق::
غیرمبهم
204 elements of contract interpretation If there is no such ambiguity, the contract is given its unambiguous (plain) meaning as a matter of law.
When the relevant language does not fail in this light, it is unambiguous and contested unreasonably.
A court then should hold that the term or contract has its unambiguous meaning as a matter of law.
First, Corbin, Article 2 of the UCC, and the Restate ment (Second) all hold that all language is general and ambiguous, so a court never should fi nd that contract language is unambiguous.18 Dis pensing with the question of ambiguity, however, does not follow from the ambiguity of all language in the abstract, which it is.
Second, subjectivism holds that the meaning in a person's mind when that person speaks or hears, reads or writes, a word-her understanding- constitutes the meaning of that word for him or her.21 Accordingly, Corbin defined interpretation as follows: The interpretation of a written contract is the process of determin ing the thoughts that the users of the words therein intended to convey to each other.22 Similarly, the Restatement (Second) explains: The objective of interpretation in the general law of contracts is to carry out the understanding of the parties rather than to impose obligations on them contrary to their understanding: "the courts do not make a contract for the parties."23 If a language-user's understanding of an expression's meaning thus constitutes the expression's meaning for her, there is little possibility of finding language unambiguous.
واژگان شبکه مترجمین ایران