Which intepretation rule states that the exemption clause is intended to cover only the matters contained in the contract.

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question asks which interpretation rule states that the exemption clause is intended to cover only the matters contained in the contract.
Option a: Ambiguity Rule. This rule is about how to interpret ambiguous terms or language within a contract, not specifically about limiting the scope of an exemption clause to what is contained in the contract. It does not express the principle of restricting the clause to the contract’s contents.
Option b: Deviation Rule. Typically, deviation rules concern deviation from standard terms or performance obligations, or how to handle departures from agreed terms; it is not the principle that bounds an exemption clause to the contract’s stated matters.
Option c: Four corners rule. This is the rule that a contract should be interpreted by looking only at the four corners of the document to determine its meaning, limiting extrinsic evidence and focusing on the contents of the contract itself. This aligns with the idea that the exemption clause covers only matters contained within the contract, as per the document’s own terms.
Option d: Negligence Rule. There is no well-known interpretation rule by this name that governs the scope of exemption clauses to the contract's contents. It likely confuses with other legal concepts related to duty of care, but it does not express the four-corners limitation.
In summary, option c is the interpretation rule that directly matches the description given in the question, whereas the other options describe different concepts or rules that do not address the scope limitation of exemption clauses to the contract’s own terms.

Which intepretation rule states that the exemption clause is intended to cover only the matters contained in the contract.

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions