Entire contractual clauses are sometimes referred to as „comprehensive agreement“ clauses. References to „representations“ (rather than misrepresentation) in a contract are not the result of an agreement to withdraw, cancel or not legally value representations, as this is a liability for the law of misrepresentation. If there are already contracts that must remain in force at the time of the new agreement, their use can be very dangerous. If, for whatever reason, the previous agreement is not expressly included, this earlier agreement may, in certain circumstances, give rise to a legally binding obligation, even if the contract contains a full contractual clause. This is due to the Estoppel doctrine by convention, which was recently discussed under the comprehensive contractual clauses contained in Mears Ltd/Shoreline Housing Partnership Ltd3. Although this was the decision of a Masters to summarise the reasons for judgment, it draws attention to the dangers of a rigid approach to the interpretation of the standard clauses of the boiler platform. As with any other clause, they are always interpreted as part of the overall contract. However, in the design phase, it is risky to rely on the Tribunal adopting a more comprehensive view of the interpretation of the standard basic rules (such as the fact that the decision was overturned in November 2018 in the context of an appeal). It is better to include the standard exclusion for misrepresentation and avoid any conflict of nat. The Parol rule states that if the intention of the parties has been reduced to the letter, there is a general presumption that a written contract contains all the terms of the agreement between the parties. As a general rule, it is not permissible to provide oral or written extrinsic evidence, either to demonstrate what the parties intended to enter into this contract, or to contradict, amend or supplement the terms of the written agreement (including unspoken terms). The Parol rule of evidence is subject to certain exceptions, the details of which are detailed below. „1) This agreement [and, if applicable, the list of other relevant agreements] constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and replaces and annxes all previous drafts, agreements, agreements and agreements between them, in writing or orally, with respect to this matter.
In the case of Mears Ltd. v. Shoreline Housing Partnership Ltd.22, Mears entered into a contract for the repair and maintenance of several thousand properties operated by Shoreline. It wasn`t until six months after Mears started working for Shoreline that the repair and maintenance contact was completed. For the six-month period prior to the signing of the final contract, Mears was paid on a compound basis.