Rainy Sky v Kookmin Bank

Fab case name, and a helpful point for A2 Contract Law students considering construction. It is well established that, in constructing the meaning of a term, the Court will take an objective approach - they will look through the eyes of the reasonable man, assuming relevant background knowledge.

In this case, the Supreme Court follows the reasoning in Schuler v Wickman. Rather than only departing from the above test only where it produces a result so extreme as to suggest it was unintended, where there are two alternative meanings, the Court will prefer the one that makes business sense, as per Lord Clarke:

If there are two possible constructions, the court is entitled to prefer the construction which is consistent with business common sense and to reject the other..

This is also a relatively short and digestible judgment for more able students to have a look at.