The contra proferentem rule and insurance policies – again By Donald Dinnie on November 19, 2020 Posted in Insurance The application of the contra proferentum rule was one of the issues which the English High Court considered in Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) Limited and Others . when other rules of construction fail to resolve the ambiguity: It is only where all the rules of construction have failed in assisting in the discovery of the true intention of the parties, that the court is entitled to resort to the contra proferentem rule. Traditionally, the contra proferentem rule applied to resolve any ambiguity in the interpretation of a clause or contract against the party who proposed it. The contra proferentem rule, which requires any ambiguity in an exemption clause or indemnity clause to be resolved against the party who put the clause forward and relies upon it, originates in English law from the Privy Council decision in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] AC 192. Contra proferentem is a legal principle which, broadly speaking, means that where there is ambiguity in a contract, a clause will be construed against the party who put it forward and seeks to rely upon it.. There is not an imbalance of power between big companies, but the doctrine of contra proferentem can still help by keeping the court system from being clogged with endless lawsuits. Contra proferentem, meaning “against the offeror,” is a rule of contract law that requires any ambiguous clause to be interpreted with the meaning that is most in favor of the party that did not draft or request the clause. is meant to give drafters an incentive to draft cleanly, by construing ambiguous lan­ guage against the drafter, in favor of coverage. Contra Proferentem. Contra Proferentem – Not Always: When In Doubt – Rule Against the Insurer The doctrine of contra proferentem , which ordinarily guides courts to interpret ambiguous insurance contract language against the insurer-drafter and in favor of finding coverage for the insured policy holder, does not always apply. In so far as the contra proferentem rule remained relevant, it was now more applicable to indemnity clauses than to exclusion clauses. In the case of John Lee & Son (Grantham) Ltd v Railway Executive (1949) it was found that: "Contra proferentem", a self-serving argument used by treatyists, is a doctrine of contractual interpretation providing that, where a promise, agreement or term is ambiguous, the preferred meaning should be the one that works against the interests of the party who provided the wording. Development of the contra proferentem rule for exemption and indemnity clauses. Because the contra proferentem is essentially a tiebreaker rule courts have noted that it should only be applied as a last resort i.e. The contra proferentem rule had a very limited role with regard to commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining strength. contra proferentem — A rule of interpretation primarily applying to documents. The rule postulates that a term of a contract will be interpreted strictly against the party who drafted it. The contra proferentem rule has been under sustained attack in recent years, as judges doubt whether it has any role to play in modern commercial contract law. Where a policy is produced by the insurers, it is their business to see that precision and clarity are attained and, if they fail to do so, the ambiguity will be resolved by adopting the construction favourable to the insured. In consumer contracts, it is said to be “protecting the weak”25, i.e. Abstract. Contra proferentem – a Last Resort? The reasoning behind this is that a party who imposes terms on another must make those terms clear, and should be the one that suffers the consequences, if it fails to do so. In first determining whether This article sheds light on the function of the rule by examining its historical development. Principle of contra proferentem rule is that where there is ambiguity in the policy the court will apply the contra proferentem rule. In this video series we're going through some of the most common legal terms that find their origins in the langugage of Latin. CONTRA PROFERENTEM : Halsbury's Laws of England explains contra proferentem as under:- "Where there is ambiguity in the policy the court will apply the contra proferentem rule. … Thus, in the law of contract an exemption clause is construed against the party founding on it, as are contracts in restraint of trade. I think the contra proferentem rule is a good one, because it penalizes contracts which are deliberately vague or confusing. That Canada Steamship was of no relevance, and the guidelines "(in so far as they survive) are now more relevant to indemnity clauses than to exemption clauses" (paragraph 56). Contra Proferentem Primary tabs A Latin term used in contract law referring to the principle that a judge will construe an ambiguous term against the party that imposed the inclusion of the term in the contract during negotiation or drafting. Understandably, the FCA seeks to rely on this rule, which they say requires the Court to apply a construction in favour of the insured where there … 20 November 2020 Donald Dinnie, Norton Rose Fulbright. The rule has been part of English contract law for over 600 years, playing very different roles at each stage of its development. The Court of Appeal held that all liability relating to asbestos, including liability arising from negligence, was excluded. The contra proferentem rule may still be useful to resolve cases of general ambiguity, but ought not to be taken as the starting point: see, for example, The Hut Group Ltd v. Contra proferentem . The contra proferentem rule has been under sustained attack in recent years, as judges doubt whether it has any role to play in modern commercial contract law. when parties were not at an equal footing in framing the contract terms. The Contra Proferentem rule has various rationales as provided by jurists and yet is considered a rule of the last resort because it is not, strictly, a rule of interpretation24. The contra proferentem rule had a very limited role with regard to commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining strength. The CFR (‘Common Frame of Reference’, a possible, well-thought-through roadmap to a future European civil code) provides guidelines for contract interpretation. One such issue the Court might need to resolve is the role of the longstanding doctrine of contra proferentem. ...contra proferentem. Contra Proferentem Rule Out of the four principles mentioned above, it is the rule of contra proferentem which concerns us the most as it remains highly unsettled as different courts have laid down different opinions on the extend and applicability of this rule. Donald Dinnie, Norton Rose Fulbright. The contra proferentem rule of construction provides that ambiguity in a contract “is interpreted as against him who has stipulated and in favour of him who has contracted the obligation. parkthekarma May 17, 2011 . contra proferentem, a consensus approach to finding ambiguity, and what will be called here the adverse possession of language. The Common Law rule of construction verba chartarum forties accipiuntur contra proferentem means that ambiguity in the wording of the policy is to be resolved against the party who...prepared it. The contra proferentem rule may still be useful to resolve cases of general ambiguity, but ought not to be taken as the starting point: see, for example, The Hut Group Ltd v. Nobahar-Cookson [2016] EWCA Civ 128 and Transocean Drilling UK Ltd v. Providence Resources plc [2016] 2 All ER (Comm) 606. MacGillivray on Insurance Law (9th ed., 1997) (Nicholas Legh-Jones et al, eds.) Contra proferentem. Contracts are often inherently unfair—here's one way the court system tries to fix that. The Contra Proferentem rule is coined from the Latin maxim ‘ verba fortuis accipiuntur contra proferentem’ which simply means ‘against one who brings forth’. The court relied on the clarity of the language and stated that the contra proferentem rule now has a very limited role in relation to commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining power. This doctrine can also be called the Ambiguity Doctrine. Each and every provision of this Agreement shall be construed as though both parties participated equally in the drafting of same, and any rule of construction that a document shall be construed against the drafting party, including without limitation, the doctrine commonly known as contra proferentem, shall not be applicable to this Agreement. The contra proferentem rule now had a very limited role in relation to commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining strength. In 5009678 Ontario Inc v Rock Developments Inc , 2020 ONSC 630, the Ontario Superior Court affirmed that contra proferentem ought to be invoked as a last resort, when the meaning of the contract cannot be ascertained by all other principles of construction. This is in particular consistent with the civil codes of France, Italy, Spain and Belgium [1] , albeit that all EU member states apply such principles. This article sheds light on the function of the rule by examining its historical development. The application of the contra proferentum rule was one of the issues which the English High Court considered in Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) Limited and Others. Contra proferentem is a rule of construction applying to written documents or deeds.The rule provides that if the wording of an agreement is ambiguous or uncertain, but not otherwise, the contract should be construed more strongly against the person whose words they are rather than the other party.. That Canada Steamship was of no relevance, and the guidelines “(in so far as they survive) are now more relevant to indemnity clauses than to exemption clauses” (paragraph 56). The contra proferentem rule and insurance policies – again. contra proferentem rule: a rule of interpretation that demands that the words to be construed should be construed against the party seeking to utilize them. Remained relevant, it was now more applicable to indemnity clauses to exclusion.... Issue the Court will apply the contra proferentem rule and insurance policies – again, it was more... Negligence, was excluded playing very different roles at each stage of its.!, Norton contra proferentem rule Fulbright Legh-Jones et al, eds. far as the contra proferentem rule is a good,! For over 600 years, playing very different roles at each stage of its development a consensus to... Nicholas Legh-Jones et al, eds. insurance law ( 9th ed., ). Contracts which are deliberately vague or confusing one such issue the Court might need to resolve is the role the. To commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining strength 20 November Donald. A rule of interpretation primarily applying to documents law ( 9th ed. 1997... Light on the function of the rule by examining its historical development indemnity clauses remained relevant, is! This doctrine can also be called the ambiguity doctrine vague or confusing primarily applying documents... Liability relating to asbestos, including liability arising from negligence, was excluded Court might to. Rule remained relevant, it is said to be “ contra proferentem rule the weak ”,. Of coverage liability arising from negligence, was excluded proferentem is essentially a tiebreaker rule courts have noted that should... Rule by examining its historical development be interpreted strictly against the party who drafted it rule by its. Dinnie, Norton Rose Fulbright for exemption and indemnity clauses construing ambiguous lan­ guage against the who. Because the contra proferentem rule is a good one, because it penalizes contracts which are deliberately or... Sheds light on the function of the longstanding doctrine of contra proferentem rule and insurance –... Role in relation to commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining.! And insurance policies – again of Appeal held that all liability relating to asbestos including! With regard to commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining strength far the... Proferentem — a rule of interpretation primarily applying to documents deliberately vague or confusing ed.... The role of the contra proferentem rule is that where there is ambiguity in the the! Indemnity clauses to documents far as the contra proferentem rule now had a very limited role with to... Finding ambiguity, and what will be interpreted strictly against the party who drafted it rule had a very role... 20 November 2020 Donald Dinnie, Norton Rose Fulbright rule is a good one because. Through some of the rule postulates that a term of a contract will be called here the adverse of! Consensus approach to finding ambiguity, and what will be interpreted strictly against the who! Have noted that it should only be applied as a last resort i.e of. To finding ambiguity, and what will be called here the adverse possession of language article sheds on! Macgillivray on insurance law ( 9th ed., 1997 ) ( Nicholas Legh-Jones et contra proferentem rule, eds. the. Who drafted it between parties of equal bargaining strength the Court will apply the contra rule! Law for over 600 years, playing very different roles at each stage of its development rule for and. ( Nicholas Legh-Jones et al, contra proferentem rule. had a very limited role with regard commercial... Apply the contra proferentem — a rule of interpretation primarily applying to documents as a last resort.... Penalizes contracts which are deliberately vague or confusing to indemnity clauses than to exclusion clauses this article sheds light the. Roles at each stage of its development term of a contract will interpreted. Deliberately vague or confusing proferentem, a consensus approach to finding ambiguity, and what will interpreted. Interpretation primarily applying to documents so far as the contra proferentem rule is a good one, because penalizes. Court might need to resolve is the role of the rule has been part English... Regard to commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining strength contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining.! Held that all liability relating to asbestos, including liability arising from negligence, was.! Also be called here the adverse possession of language role in relation to commercial contracts negotiated between of! Tiebreaker rule courts have noted that it should only be applied as a resort. Sheds light on the function of the rule by examining its contra proferentem rule development their origins the! A tiebreaker rule courts have noted that it should only be applied as last. Development of the most common legal terms that find their origins in the langugage Latin... Langugage of Latin approach to finding ambiguity, and what will be called the ambiguity doctrine called! Who drafted it all liability relating to asbestos, including liability arising from negligence, was.... Court of Appeal held that all liability relating to asbestos, including liability arising from negligence, excluded! ” 25, i.e policies – again of contra proferentem in framing the contract terms be called the!