Interpretation of Contracts: Reflections on Ruling No. 17063 of 2024

The recent ruling No. 17063 of June 20, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers 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 they can influence daily contractual practices.

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 legal acts. In particular, the judge must follow a precise interpretative path, as established by Articles 1362 et seq. of the Civil Code.

Criteria for Contract Interpretation

Interpretation suitable for conferring meaning on the contract in any case - Supplementary and subsidiary criterion under art. 1367 of the Civil Code - Usability - Limits. To ascertain the common intention of the parties, the judge must first proceed with the literal interpretation of the legal act and of the individual clauses, both individually and in relation to each other, according to the main interpretative criteria provided for in Articles 1362 et seq. of the Civil Code; the judge may resort to the criterion under art. 1367 of the Civil Code, which is subsidiary and supplementary in nature, only if they have not been able to ascertain the common intention 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 intention of the parties must clearly emerge from the reading of the contractual clauses, without having to resort to interpretations that could alter the original meaning of the agreement.

Practical Implications of the Ruling

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

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

Conclusions

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