A Lease That Behaved Like a Sale And a Clause That Shifted Everything
Ecosse v Gee Dee clarifies that ambiguous contract terms are interpreted by their commercial purpose, not their literal wording. The High Court held that a reasonable businessperson’s understanding governs long-term agreements.
Clarity Without Guesswork: What Mount Bruce Mining v Wright Prospecting Teaches Every Australian About Contracts
A decades-old mining agreement triggered a $130 million dispute because key phrases were read differently years later. The High Court restored commercial common sense: contracts mean what reasonable businesspeople would understand in their proper context. This case shows how clarity of structure protects everyone — and how ambiguity grows costly when decisions rely on a single interpretation.