Rainy Sky v Kookmin Bank
Recommend on Google+
Fab case name, and a helpful point for A2 Contract Law students considering construction. It is well established that, in constructing the meaning of a term, the Court will take an objective approach - they will look through the eyes of the reasonable man, assuming relevant background knowledge.
In this case, the Supreme Court follows the reasoning in Schuler v Wickman. Rather than only departing from the above test only where it produces a result so extreme as to suggest it was unintended, where there are two alternative meanings, the Court will prefer the one that makes business sense, as per Lord Clarke:
If there are two possible constructions, the court is entitled to prefer the construction which is consistent with business common sense and to reject the other..
This is also a relatively short and digestible judgment for more able students to have a look at.
A Single European Contract Law? [31 Oct 2011]
The Supreme Court - VIDEO [26 Oct 2011]
Must-read! [11 Oct 2011]
Poor set to suffer most from legal aid cuts [28 Jun 2011]
Supreme Court to rule on meaning of miscarriage of justice [9 May 2011]
Supreme Court video clips [6 Apr 2011]
The end of immunity for expert witnesses [4 Apr 2011]
Judicial Diversity and the Supreme Court [30 Mar 2011]
Cuts and judicial independence [9 Feb 2011]
Oceanbulk Shipping v TMT Asia [2010] UKSC 44 [16 Nov 2010]
We want pre-nup! [20 Oct 2010]
Will the Supreme Court survive the cuts? [24 Sep 2010]
Legal Heroes [18 Aug 2010]
Contract Law and Part 36 [4 Jul 2010]
A single opinion? [7 May 2010]
New Supreme Court Justice [31 Mar 2010]
Separation of Powers [6 Feb 2010]
LAW TEACHER RESOURCE NEWSLETTER
Sign up for the free Law Teacher Resource Newsletter from tutor2u
