Contract Interpretation: Reflections on Judgment No. 17063 of 2024

The recent ruling No. 17063 of June 20, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important insights into the issue of contract interpretation. In this article, we will explore the content of this ruling, highlighting the legal principles it establishes and how these may influence everyday contractual practices.

The Context of the Ruling

In the case between M. (G. U.) and N. (C. A. G.), the Court of Cassation intervened to clarify the limits and applicability of the conservative interpretation of contracts. The ruling rejects the appeal filed by the plaintiff, confirming the importance of a correct literal interpretation of contractual acts. In particular, the judge must follow a precise interpretative path, as established by Articles 1362 and following of the Civil Code.

The Criteria for Contract Interpretation

Interpretation suitable for attributing meaning to the contract - Integrative and subsidiary criterion referred to in Article 1367 of the Civil Code - Usability - Limits. To identify the common intention of the parties, the judge must first proceed with the literal interpretation of the contractual act and the individual clauses both separately and one through the other, according to the main hermeneutic criteria provided by Articles 1362 and following of the Civil Code; the judge may utilize the criterion referred to in Article 1367 of the Civil Code, which has a subsidiary and integrative character, only if he has not been able to identify the common intent of the parties through the use of the aforementioned interpretative rules; otherwise, conservative interpretation cannot take place.

This maxim emphasizes the importance of an initial phase of literal and systematic analysis of the contract. Only after exhausting these criteria can the judge resort to conservative interpretation, which must always be considered as a last resort. This implies that the intent of the parties must emerge clearly from the reading of the contractual clauses, without having to resort to interpretations that could alter the original meaning of the agreement.

The Practical Implications of the Ruling

  • Clarity and precision in drafting contracts: parties must pay attention to the formulation of clauses to avoid ambiguities.
  • Relevance of communication between the parties: it is essential that intentions are clearly expressed to facilitate interpretation.
  • Role of the judge: the judge must limit himself to interpreting according to the established rules, avoiding personal interpretations that may distort the meaning of the contract.

These considerations not only help to ensure greater legal certainty but also reduce disputes arising from contractual misunderstandings.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 17063 of 2024 represents an important guide for lawyers and legal practitioners, emphasizing the importance of a rigorous and systematic interpretation of contracts. Clarity in drafting and the correct understanding of contractual intentions are key elements in preventing disputes and ensuring the validity of agreements. Adherence to the principles established by the Civil Code is essential for effective management of contractual relationships.

Bianucci Law Firm