Implied terms again,or how Lord Hoffmann got treated in Marks & Spencer

Abstract

This comment summarizes and reflects on the decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in Marks and Spencer v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd. It presents the leading judgment as an attempt to obstruct the development of a welcome new understanding of implication of contract terms as an exercise in contractual construction. This attempt is unconvincing, requiring an unduly timid reading of Lord Hoffmann’s influential judgment in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd.

Keywords

construction contract implication implied terms

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Davies

(2010) Recent developments in the law of implied terms. LMCLQ 140.

Hooley

(2014) Implied terms after Belize Telecom. Cambridge Law Journal 73(2): 315–349.

Kramer

(2004) Implication in fact as an instance of contractual interpretation. Cambridge Law Journal 63(2): 384–411.

McCaughran

(2011) Implied terms: The journey of the man on the Clapham omnibus. Cambridge Law Journal 70(3): 607–622.

Peters

(2009) The implication of terms in fact. Cambridge Law Journal 68(3): 513–515.