Re:United Passenger “Removal”: A Reporting and Management Fa...
by notacoward on Wednesday April 12, 2017 @10:23PM
(#14103624)
Two important points raised by a lawyer about how to interpret the Contract of Carriage (or any other).
(1) When the meaning of a term (e.g. "boarding") is ambiguous or undefined, courts are required to interpret it in the way less favorable to the drafter of the contract.
(2) If the conditions under which one party may do something are enumerated, they may not do it for reasons other than those on the list.
Both principles of legal interpretation go against United in this case. Remember, this is civil law - not criminal. The burden of proof is very different. While many such contracts are too one-sided, rules such as these exist to ensure that they can't be entirely so. A completely one-sided contract might even violate the requirement that it involve mutual consideration, making it a legal non-entity.
(1) When the meaning of a term (e.g. "boarding") is ambiguous or undefined, courts are required to interpret it in the way less favorable to the drafter of the contract.
(2) If the conditions under which one party may do something are enumerated, they may not do it for reasons other than those on the list.
Both principles of legal interpretation go against United in this case. Remember, this is civil law - not criminal. The burden of proof is very different. While many such contracts are too one-sided, rules such as these exist to ensure that they can't be entirely so. A completely one-sided contract might even violate the requirement that it involve mutual consideration, making it a legal non-entity.