Show Summary Details
Page of

(p. 177) 13. Implication 

(p. 177) 13. Implication
Chapter:
(p. 177) 13. Implication
Author(s):

Paul S. Davies

DOI:
10.1093/he/9780198807810.003.0013
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD LAW TROVE (www.oxfordlawtrove.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Law Trove for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 25 August 2019

This chapter examines whether a term should be imported into the contract, although it was never expressed in words; should the term be implied? A term can be implied into a particular contract because it’s necessary to give effect to the parties’ intentions. This is known as ‘implication in fact’. Whether a term should be implied ‘in fact’ has traditionally depended upon whether the term was so obvious to both parties that it went without saying, or whether the term was necessary to give ‘business efficacy’ to the contract. A term might be implied ‘in law’ into all contracts of a particular type. Such terms might be implied as a result of statute or judicial decisions. Where a judge decides that a term should be implied ‘in law’, courts can take into account policy reasons when deciding whether an implied term is necessary for the type of contract at issue.

Access to the complete content on Law Trove requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access code, please see the information provided with the code or instructions printed within the title for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.