Elisha v Vision Australia [2024] HCA 50
The High Court rarely says very much about the basic principles applied in working out what a contract means. In this case (at [38]), the plurality stated –
The meaning of the terms of the … Contract … ‘is to be determined by what a reasonable person would have understood [the terms] to mean’. This requires consideration of the common intention of the parties by reference to the object and text of the provision as well as the surrounding circumstances. [This] is ‘to be understood as referring to what a reasonable person would understand by the language in which the parties have expressed their agreement’.
This emphasises the objective nature of the task11. A reasonable person here would have understood the policies in question to create binding obligations12.
This principle is from Episode 116 of interpretation NOW!
Footnotes:
11 cf Automotive Invest [2024] HCA 36 [115], Episodes 92 & 96.