Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
ATAS/312/2004 • CJ GE ATAS/312/2004 Généré par l'IA

Appellant v. Respondent on Contractual Ambiguity and Extrinsic Evidence in Royalty Calculation

Numéro de cause ATAS/312/2004
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The appellant challenged a lower court's ruling regarding the construction of a document, asserting that the trial court improperly relied on extrinsic evidence to interpret an unambiguous contractual provision, specifically concerning the calculation of a royalty payment based on a contract term that referenced a prior agreement's structure. The appellate court reasoned that while the contract's language suggested a clear intent regarding the application of the referenced agreement, the trial court correctly admitted the extrinsic evidence because the term was ambiguous when read in the context of the entire agreement and the parties' course of performance, ultimately affirming the lower court's determination that the royalty calculation method was properly ascertained through the consideration of surrounding circumstances and historical conduct.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Appellant v. Respondent on Contractual Ambiguity and Extrinsic Evidence in Royalty Calculation: The appellate court reasoned that while the contract's language suggested a clear intent regarding the application of the referenced agreement, the trial court correctly admitted the extrinsic evidence because the term was ambiguous when read in the context of the entire agreement and the parties' course of performance, ultimately affirming the lower court's determination that the royalty calculation method was properly ascertained through the consideration of surrounding circumstances and historical conduct.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
contre-prestation contractuelle interprétation de l'arrêt nature de l'infraction objet du litige péremption en droit commercial titre représentatif de marchandises

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Généré par l'IA

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

The court orders the losing party to pay the costs of the federal court.

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

               "#$#"%$$& "'(%"%$$&

))

* )*   *)   

+,  - . &  %$$& 



/ 0000000000 ! " #$ % &    ! '(!))*$($!)$$



! 

  1   ! $!$( ) #+,-./



                 !

   43054  

 2

67  5 322- $!8/$)!$9  : ) )($$! %!;"$ <<<<<<<<<< !)' &) = 752>74).6 $32257

37  ,   322- "7 <<<<<<<<<<     $? ! )   $;'! )!!) $. )($$7

57 3@/ $322-  $)( (  $! A!($!$ )"7<<<<<<<<<<! ))($$ A!!7



 )

67 B! )' !7,3736. # )$=()(   !$8(( ) ) $!) $)@!? 32229 :)($$/!+!  !!*( )  52 A    /$ )'$!$  . ) '   *$   )7

)($$ $!$!A!!;   .) $?!)  $9 !7,@!,1 :7 $?)(!(!!  B$ )($$ $!$ )$!$)$=()(   ' 4/$$ !  /$/! ) 32 )(?  6C-@ 9 &: 9 !7 ,@ 7 6 !!7#76:7

37  '.    )$! +!  )( ( $ /? ).   *'$  (!( $! A!( ! )($$)5 322-!! $!(   $!$7



  01210322-  45054  



)  2  )*   *)   

3/4/   5  6// /  7! (+% 

67 (   $ /?D

37 =    !$ )  *' /! =     !    (!  +! )  )($ ) 52 A  ).  !$=$!$   $ )( ) (  $? =()(  )   &#E$F #=*$ @ @22-     ! $ B$ 7  )($  ! +!   8(7  ($  )$!G : $)$*  B!!*)($$  !)($ ?!$ $!))($$ !!*(D ?: B    * !$= $ !$ /$  ))  !! !  )($$D :  !   $8!    )   (!!7 &$  ($   !$!   ! $ ((! (( (  !!  : ?: ! : $4)  $?=()( )  !  !$.    *'$ )/ )(  $ /?7($ )  !$  % )  / *$  ! A$! $$ *  )($$ !!*( ! '/ ) *(!(B()$(  !9 !765362@!62>:7  8 ==$. G   ($)!G   %& ( $"   $= ) (! +!!!$=$(B !$$$*';'==$=()(  ) $ 8 ==

  01210322-