Drafting a Breach Clause Without Ambiguity
A law firm is finalising a legal notice for breach of a supply contract. The operative clause reads: 'The supplier shall deliver the goods within 30 days of the receipt of the purchase order and in default the buyer may terminate the contract and claim damages which shall be limited to the value of the goods ordered.' The partner asks whether the clause is ambiguous, whether the 30-day period begins on the date of receipt, and whether the damages cap applies when the buyer terminates. The draft also contains the sentence: 'Having failed to deliver, the buyer's representatives sent reminders.' The notice uses 'shall' in one place and 'may' in another without a clear pattern. The client wants a revised clause that is enforceable and a short explanation of the drafting choices. The associate must also explain how a court would construe 'within 30 days of receipt' under the General Clauses Act, 1897.
1. Identify the ambiguities and grammatical defects in the clause and the sentence.
Read the worked answer
The clause has three ambiguities. First, 'within 30 days of the receipt' does not say whether the date of receipt is included. Second, the relative clause 'which shall be limited to the value of the goods ordered' may modify 'damages' or the whole right to terminate and claim; the antecedent is unclear. Third, 'shall' in the delivery obligation is mandatory, while 'may' in the termination right is discretionary, but the draft does not distinguish the consequences. The sentence 'Having failed to deliver, the buyer's representatives sent reminders' contains a dangling modifier: grammatically, the representatives are said to have failed to deliver. The sentence should name the supplier as the party that failed.
2. Rewrite the clause and the sentence to remove the ambiguity.
Read the worked answer
Revised clause: 'The supplier must deliver the goods no later than 30 days after the date of receipt of the purchase order. If the supplier fails to deliver within that period, the buyer may terminate this contract and claim damages. The buyer's total damages under this clause shall not exceed the value of the goods ordered.' Revised sentence: 'Because the supplier had failed to deliver, the buyer's representatives sent reminders.' The revision fixes the time from the day after receipt, makes delivery mandatory, separates termination from damages, and limits the cap to damages. It also removes the dangling modifier by supplying the subject 'the supplier'.
3. Explain the legal effect of 'shall' and 'may' and the computation of time under the General Clauses Act.
Read the worked answer
In legal drafting, 'shall' traditionally imposes a mandatory obligation, while 'may' confers a discretion or power. Modern drafters often use 'must' for a mandatory duty and reserve 'shall' for declarations, but the key is consistency. On time, section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 provides that in computing time from a specified date, the first day is excluded. A clause saying 'within 30 days of receipt' is therefore read as 30 days from the day after receipt, but the safer draft is 'no later than 30 days after the date of receipt'. The revised wording avoids the dispute and gives the court a clear objective standard.