6.2 The Parol Evidence Rule: Scope and Exceptions
2 min read•july 22, 2024
The is a crucial aspect of contract law that governs the use of external evidence in contract disputes. It aims to uphold the integrity of written agreements by limiting the introduction of prior or contemporaneous agreements that contradict the final contract.
This rule has exceptions, including , , , and . Understanding these exceptions is key to determining when external evidence can be used to interpret or supplement a written contract. Knowing how to apply this rule is essential for maintaining contract reliability.
The Parol Evidence Rule
Parol evidence rule definition
Top images from around the web for Parol evidence rule definition
Co-constructing integrity: A conceptual framework View original
Is this image relevant?
Oral contract - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Contracts - 1L Survival Guide - Research Guides at Florida State University College of Law ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Co-constructing integrity: A conceptual framework View original
Is this image relevant?
Oral contract - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Parol evidence rule definition
Co-constructing integrity: A conceptual framework View original
Is this image relevant?
Oral contract - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Contracts - 1L Survival Guide - Research Guides at Florida State University College of Law ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Co-constructing integrity: A conceptual framework View original
Is this image relevant?
Oral contract - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- Substantive rule of contract law governs admissibility of in contract disputes
- Promotes integrity and certainty of written contracts by prohibiting introduction of prior or contemporaneous oral or written agreements that contradict or vary terms of final written contract
- Binds parties to terms of final written document
- Allows for reliability and predictability of written contracts
Excluded evidence types
- Prior negotiations and agreements
- Oral or written communications between parties before final written contract executed (draft agreements, letters of intent, preliminary documents)
- Contemporaneous
- Oral agreements or understandings made at same time as written contract execution not included in final written contract
- Contradictory or supplementary terms
- Evidence contradicting or varying written contract terms
- Attempts to add terms or conditions not found in written contract
Exceptions to parol evidence rule
- Ambiguity
- Unclear or multiple interpretations of written contract language
- Extrinsic evidence admitted to clarify intended meaning of ambiguous terms
- Fraud
- One party induces other to enter contract through fraudulent misrepresentation or concealment of material facts
- Extrinsic evidence admitted to prove fraud existence and invalidate contract
- Mistake
- Both parties enter contract under shared mistaken belief about material fact
- Extrinsic evidence admitted to reform contract to reflect parties' true intentions
- Collateral agreements
- Separate oral or written agreements not contradicting or varying main contract terms
- Admitted if independent and not integrated into final written contract
Admissibility of extrinsic evidence
- Determine if written contract is complete integration
- is final expression of parties' intent, supersedes prior or contemporaneous agreements
- Extrinsic evidence generally not admissible to vary or contradict fully integrated contract terms
- Identify type of extrinsic evidence offered (prior negotiations, contemporaneous oral agreements, )
- Determine if evidence falls within recognized exceptions to parol evidence rule
- Apply relevant exception, if applicable
- If contract ambiguous, consider extrinsic evidence to clarify term meanings
- If fraud or mistake alleged, evaluate evidence to determine if it supports claim
- For collateral agreements, assess if truly independent of main contract
- Make determination on admissibility of extrinsic evidence
- If no exception applies, parol evidence rule likely bars admission of evidence
- If exception applies, extrinsic evidence may be admissible to supplement or interpret written contract
Key Terms to Review (16)
Ambiguity: Ambiguity refers to the presence of multiple meanings or interpretations in language, which can lead to uncertainty in understanding a contract's terms. This uncertainty can result in disputes between parties if the language used is not clear, impacting the enforceability of contracts and the remedies available for breaches. Understanding ambiguity is crucial because it can affect how courts interpret agreements and determine if a breach is material or minor, influence the application of the parol evidence rule, shape common clauses, and define key components in contract drafting.
Collateral Agreements: Collateral agreements are side agreements that accompany a main contract and can clarify or supplement its terms. These agreements may exist to add detail or address aspects that the main contract does not cover, ensuring that the intentions of the parties are fully realized. Understanding collateral agreements is crucial, as they often play a role in the interpretation and enforcement of the primary contract, particularly in light of the parol evidence rule and the overall importance of contracts in legal and business contexts.
Contemporaneous negotiations: Contemporaneous negotiations refer to discussions and agreements that occur at the same time as the formation of a contract, often involving the parties negotiating terms that may or may not be included in the final written document. These negotiations are critical in understanding the intentions of the parties involved, especially when interpreting what was meant by specific provisions in a contract. They play a key role in determining whether external evidence can be admitted to clarify or contradict the terms of a written agreement under certain exceptions to established legal rules.
Contradictory Terms: Contradictory terms refer to a situation in which two statements or clauses conflict with each other and cannot both be true at the same time. This concept is particularly relevant in contract law, where the presence of contradictory terms in a contract can create confusion about the parties' intentions and lead to disputes. Understanding how these terms interact with the parol evidence rule is essential for resolving ambiguities in contract interpretation.
Express Terms: Express terms are specific provisions or stipulations that are clearly articulated and agreed upon by the parties involved in a contract. These terms outline the rights, duties, and obligations of each party and form the foundation of the agreement. Understanding express terms is crucial for interpreting contracts, especially in relation to how they interact with external evidence and modifications.
Extrinsic Evidence: Extrinsic evidence refers to any information or material that is not contained within the four corners of a contract but can be used to interpret, clarify, or support claims regarding the contract. This type of evidence can help explain the intentions of the parties involved and provide context that may not be explicitly stated in the contract itself. Extrinsic evidence becomes particularly relevant when dealing with ambiguous language or when exploring the scope and exceptions of legal rules that govern contracts.
Final Agreement: A final agreement is a legally binding contract that represents the complete and definitive understanding between the parties involved, reflecting all terms and conditions of their agreement. This type of agreement often signifies that all negotiations have concluded, and no further modifications or discussions will alter the contract's contents unless both parties consent. Understanding final agreements is crucial when evaluating the admissibility of evidence in court, particularly in relation to the parol evidence rule.
Fraud: Fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual, and it can significantly impact the formation and enforcement of contracts. In the context of contracts, fraud can arise when one party makes false representations that induce the other party to enter into an agreement. This concept is crucial for understanding how misrepresentations affect a contract's validity and what remedies might be available if fraud is proven.
Integrated Agreement: An integrated agreement is a written contract that represents the complete and final expression of the parties' intentions, essentially merging all prior negotiations, discussions, and agreements into a single document. This type of agreement serves as a definitive source of the terms and conditions that govern the relationship between the parties involved. It plays a crucial role in determining the scope of the parol evidence rule, which restricts the use of outside evidence to alter or contradict the written terms of the contract.
Integration Clause: An integration clause is a provision in a contract that establishes the agreement as the complete and final expression of the parties’ intentions, indicating that any prior negotiations or agreements are superseded by the written contract. This clause is critical because it helps to ensure that the contract is interpreted based solely on its text, minimizing disputes over external statements or understandings that could affect its meaning.
Masterson v. Sine: Masterson v. Sine is a notable case in contract law that addresses the application of the Parol Evidence Rule, particularly its scope and exceptions. The case examines how external evidence can be introduced to clarify or modify written agreements, especially when there is ambiguity. It highlights the balance between upholding written contracts and allowing parties to explain their intentions through additional evidence.
Mistake: A mistake in contract law refers to an incorrect belief held by one or both parties about a material fact relevant to the agreement. It can lead to a contract being voidable if it significantly affects the parties' understanding or intentions. Mistakes can be classified as mutual, where both parties share the same erroneous belief, or unilateral, where only one party is mistaken. Understanding how mistakes interact with contract terms is crucial when considering the Parol Evidence Rule, which governs the admissibility of external evidence in interpreting contracts.
Oral Agreements: Oral agreements are contracts that are spoken and not written down. They can be just as binding as written contracts, but they can be harder to enforce because proving their existence and specific terms can be challenging. These agreements often rely on the memory of the parties involved and can lead to disputes if there are disagreements about what was said.
Parol Evidence Rule: The parol evidence rule is a legal principle that prevents parties from introducing oral or written statements made prior to or during the formation of a contract that contradict or modify the written terms of that contract. This rule is essential for maintaining the integrity of written agreements and establishes that only the final, written version of the contract holds legal weight. It plays a critical role in understanding how contracts are interpreted, particularly concerning integration and merger clauses and the various sources of contract law.
UCC § 2-202: UCC § 2-202, also known as the Parol Evidence Rule, states that if there is a written contract intended to be a final expression of the agreement, then no prior oral or written statements can be used to contradict, modify, or add to the terms of that written contract. This rule helps to preserve the integrity of written agreements by limiting the evidence that parties can present regarding their intentions outside of the written document.
Written Agreement: A written agreement is a formalized contract that outlines the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties involved, serving as a definitive record of their intentions and obligations. It is crucial in legal contexts as it establishes the basis for enforcing the contract and helps to clarify misunderstandings or disputes that may arise. The clarity and specificity in a written agreement are essential for the application of rules like the Parol Evidence Rule, which governs what external evidence can be considered when interpreting the document.