Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

CONTRACT: No Rainy Sky over the Gower Peninsula

02 October 2015  

Clare Arthurs and Sebastian Kokelaar examine the role of commercial common sense in the interpretation of contracts after Arnold v Britton

In the case of Arnold v Britton [2015] the Supreme Court has again had occasion to consider the principles governing the interpretation of contracts. This is the fourth time in a decade that this subject has been considered at the highest level. The decision is important because it revisits the question of how far the courts should allow themselves to be guided by commercial common sense in construing the language used by the parties in their agreement.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Aberdeen City Council v Stewart Milne Group Ltd [2011] UKSC 56

    Antaios Compania Naviera SA v Salen Rederierna AB [1985] AC 191

    Arnold v Britton & ors [2012] EWHC 3451 (Ch); [2013] EWCA Civ 902; [2015] UKSC 36

    Attorney General of Belize & ors v Belize Telecom Ltd & anor [2009] UKPC 10

    BMA Special Opportunity Hub Fund & ors v African Minerals Finance Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 416

    Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd & ors [2009] UKHL 38

    Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society [1997] UKHL 28

    Rainy Sky SA & ors v Kookmin Bank [2011] UKSC 50

    Skanska Rashleigh Weatherfoil Ltd v Somerfield Stores Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1732