The Costs of Contractual Certainty: RTI v MUR Shipping.
In RTI Ltd v MUR Shipping BV the UK Supreme Court resolved a knife‐edge issue of contract interpretation that divided judges and arbitrators. The Court's decision, which concerns the effect of a force majeure clause, showcases a traditional English approach to the interpretation of mercantile contra...
| Publicado en: | Modern Law Review Vol. 88; no. 2; pp. 404 - 418 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Mar2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=183920753&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 183920753 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00267961 D8H jtl: Modern Law Review issn: 00267961 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Mar2025 vid: 88 iid: 2 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 183920753 10.1111/1468-2230.12926 ppf: 404 ppct: 14 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 208KB tig: atl: The Costs of Contractual Certainty: RTI v MUR Shipping. aug: au: MacMahon, Paul su: Interpretation & construction of contracts Judges Legal judgments Appellate courts Constitutional courts sug: subj: Interpretation & construction of contracts Judges Legal judgments Appellate courts Constitutional courts ab: In RTI Ltd v MUR Shipping BV the UK Supreme Court resolved a knife‐edge issue of contract interpretation that divided judges and arbitrators. The Court's decision, which concerns the effect of a force majeure clause, showcases a traditional English approach to the interpretation of mercantile contracts. The case repays close attention for several reasons; in its lack of attention to the parties' particular purposes, its reliance on canons of construction, and its heavy stress on commercial certainty to the exclusion of other values, the Supreme Court's judgment sits uneasily with modern pronouncements on interpretation. The decision is also in tension with a line of authority disapproving of constructions that facilitate opportunism. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Modern Law Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Modern Law Review holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2025 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|