{"title":"英荷法视角下的NCC合同解释案例","authors":"Ewan Mckendrick, J.M. Luycks, Alana Hendrikx","doi":"10.54648/erpl2021004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This contribution discusses the first instance decision of the Netherlands Commercial Court between Subsea Survey Solutions LLC and South Stream Transport BV from an English and Dutch law perspective. The principal issue before the court concerned the interpretation of Clause 7 of the Settlement Agreement entered into between the parties and in particular whether or not this release and discharge clause provided South Stream with a defence to the claim which had been brought against it. This contribution discusses in a comparative way the principles of English and Dutch law which govern the interpretation of contracts. The conclusion is that the gap between the English and Dutch approach in relation to contract interpretation, although different in form, does not seem to be as broad as believed by many.","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A NCC Case on Contract Interpretation from an English and Dutch Law Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Ewan Mckendrick, J.M. Luycks, Alana Hendrikx\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/erpl2021004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This contribution discusses the first instance decision of the Netherlands Commercial Court between Subsea Survey Solutions LLC and South Stream Transport BV from an English and Dutch law perspective. The principal issue before the court concerned the interpretation of Clause 7 of the Settlement Agreement entered into between the parties and in particular whether or not this release and discharge clause provided South Stream with a defence to the claim which had been brought against it. This contribution discusses in a comparative way the principles of English and Dutch law which govern the interpretation of contracts. The conclusion is that the gap between the English and Dutch approach in relation to contract interpretation, although different in form, does not seem to be as broad as believed by many.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43736,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Review of Private Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Review of Private Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2021004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Review of Private Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2021004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
本文从英国和荷兰法律的角度讨论了荷兰商业法院在Subsea Survey Solutions LLC和South Stream Transport BV之间的一审判决。法院面临的主要问题涉及各方之间达成的和解协议第7条的解释,特别是该释放和排放条款是否为South Stream对其提出的索赔提供了辩护。这篇文章以比较的方式讨论了管理合同解释的英国和荷兰法律的原则。结论是,英国和荷兰在合同解释方面的差距,尽管形式上不同,但似乎并不像许多人认为的那样广泛。
A NCC Case on Contract Interpretation from an English and Dutch Law Perspective
This contribution discusses the first instance decision of the Netherlands Commercial Court between Subsea Survey Solutions LLC and South Stream Transport BV from an English and Dutch law perspective. The principal issue before the court concerned the interpretation of Clause 7 of the Settlement Agreement entered into between the parties and in particular whether or not this release and discharge clause provided South Stream with a defence to the claim which had been brought against it. This contribution discusses in a comparative way the principles of English and Dutch law which govern the interpretation of contracts. The conclusion is that the gap between the English and Dutch approach in relation to contract interpretation, although different in form, does not seem to be as broad as believed by many.