Abstract:
Flushed with optimism when a deal is struck, businessmen rarely welcome nit-picking. When goodwill is replaced by acrimony, the illusion of minds ad idem shatters. Even the most conscientiously drafted document can then attract debate. Matters extrinsic to the written document are often invoked in support of diametrically different interpretations. In this paper, we look at how the court treats such evidence.