Conflicting Agreement Clause

As is common practice, most jurisdictions follow the rule that handwritten terms replace pre-printed terms; Similarly, written terms take precedence over pre-printed terms. Assuming that this analysis does not work to resolve the issue, the Tribunal would check whether there is a classification clause that defines which parts of the contract/types of clauses take precedence over others (e.g. written requirements take precedence over performance requirements, addendum contains fewer imports than signed agreement, schemes have fewer imports than addendum, etc. In your hypothesis, these are the two specific terms. In this case, the court would first have the entire contract and all the nocturnal rages, specifications, plans, etc. if it excludes competing or contradictory clauses that apply the basic principle that a contract should always be interpreted as a whole – not a clause clause – and not a section by section. Contracts often contain many parts with documents specifically included by reference or many documents that can be an integral part of the transaction. If the parties accept what constitutes the different parts of the contract (even if they are not included), the set of transaction documents can be considered by Trier of facts (and law). .

. .