Närliggande

6.A requirement of clarity in support of an interpretation is not a part of the ordinary way of interpreting a contract or a declaration made by a party. The Supreme Court has stated that decisive for the interpretation is the wording of the contract, its legal background, the general object and the context. The Supreme Court has used a similar, but more extensive, formula for interpretation of insurance terms. A court shall take into account the wording, the purpose of the terms, the character of the insurance and the customers, drafting tradition, adherence to wording in legislation, case law and so on. The Supreme Court added that one also has to assess if an interpretation is sensible and reasonable. In cases where a result cannot be achieved after such an assessment, the Supreme Court held that general principles of interpretation might be applied, as the principle contra stipulatorem. This means that several factors have to be considered in the interpretation and not just one, such as the wording of the contract. The principle of contra stipulatorem shall be used only as a last resort if the other factors would not form a sufficient basis for solving the interpretation problem. If a clause is drafted in a clear way, this factor is not alone decisive under general principles of interpretation.s. 418