RECENT ISSUES ON DIGITAL GAMING AND COPYRIGHT IN KOREA
HUR, SUH HEE
A contractual relationship is most often based on statements, expectations, acts and omissions that give rise to contractual obligations. For the avoidance of uncertainty on the agreed terms, the parties will enter into an express (written) contract that is presumed to state, inter alia, the conditions and obligations of the final agreement between the parties. The legal system will ensure a literal interpretation of the wording and prevented the parties from relying on rights and obligations not expressly provided for in the written contract. However, high levels of certainty may conflict with substantial fairness in certain circumstances. Thus, to what extent the entire agreement clause purports to support what the parties have agreed to and rule out claims based on alleged collateral warranties becomes an issue when interpreting the contract.
The purpose of an entire agreement clause (EACs), depending on the words used, facilitates a record that all agreement of the parties is recorded in the express terms and excludes other alleged express terms; precludes a term that may be implied; inhibiting or estopping a party from claiming that one party was induced to enter into contract by the misrepresentation of a party; implying that the parties wish to deter courts from resorting to “factual context” or “surrounding circumstances” when interpreting the contract; and/or nullifying the effect of previous agreements or collateral contracts. Furthermore, the extent of the application of the parol evidence rule to contractual interpretation will be examined and to its effect when an EAC is provided for. This paper addresses the impact of EACs through the analysis of UK principles of contractual interpretation and the effect of EACs in this jurisdiction.