Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
ATAS/674/2006 • CJ GE ATAS/674/2006 Généré par l'IA

Contract Interpretation and Parol Evidence Rule

Numéro de cause ATAS/674/2006
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

A petitioner sought review of a lower court's decision regarding the interpretation of a contractual provision concerning the division of proceeds from an agreement. The lower court had ruled that the division must adhere strictly to the explicit terms of the written contract, rejecting an argument based on external evidence of the parties' intended allocation. The reviewing court affirmed the lower court's judgment, reasoning that the contract language was clear and unambiguous, thus precluding the admission of parol evidence to alter the clear meaning of the written agreement regarding the division percentages.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Contract Interpretation and Parol Evidence Rule: The lower court had ruled that the division must adhere strictly to the explicit terms of the written contract, rejecting an argument based on external evidence of the parties' intended allocation. The reviewing court affirmed the lower court's judgment, reasoning that the contract language was clear and unambiguous, thus precluding the admission of parol evidence to alter the clear meaning of the written agreement regarding the division percentages.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
interprétation du contrat notion de décision argumentation motivée interprétation du droit précision des normes convention de diligence

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF
The court ordered the appellant to pay the procedural costs.
Généré par l'IA
A/246/2005
Parol Evidence Rule and Contractual Integration
A/2332/2003
Contract Interpretation and Extrinsic Evidence
A/164/2006
Contract Ambiguity and Parol Evidence Admission
A/1291/1998
Parol Evidence Rule Application to Settlement Agreements
A/924/2007
Parol Evidence Rule Application in Contract Dispute

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

The court ordered the appellant to pay the procedural costs.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet



                !"#$%%" "&'$%%"



( )(* *+*  (* +)

,-. '

 $" /   $%%" 



  !

!

""       "    " # !-. !$ %&'(#)!#*+   ,



          

   3+/+3  

  $.  ))! $   ! 45 $ -)! 63 )78$+-+22,9

!:!.+0-+22,) 9

.)$$+0:+22,9

$!$0:!+22,);<- =$. ;>)75?@)!$#A!))!A!4;>))B!! $79





  +)0  )(* *+*  (* +)

 

12343-- 5  633 3  78 "$ + 9



*C $!$!!$C

+C D$EC



 4<<  ).$!         F$         

)<-$).!&!!!<.@)!)4<<



/*0,1/+22,