Boilerplate contract clauses are types or classes of contract provisions commonly found in contracts.
They may look the same if you're unfamiliar with them.
Slight differences in wording can make all the difference in the legal meaning and legal effect in a contract.
They're usually inserted at the end of a commercial contract. But they can appear anywhere in a contract.
Are they standard provisions of a contract?
Boilerplate clauses are often referred to as “standard” clauses, and a bit boring.
They’re not, if you want the contract to do what you intend it do and have the legal effect that you want it to have.
The only way boilerplate clauses are standard, is that it's a common practice to include clauses of that description, especially in business contracts.
Like all contract clauses, boilerplate clauses are interpreted using the precise words used in the clause.
Although some boilerplate clauses may look the same, they can have a significantly different legal effect.
One word in the right place is all it takes to completely change the legal meaning. Like use of the word "not", or removing it where you'd ordinarily expect to see it.
When it comes to interpretation of contracts, it’s not what the parties might have intended the boilerplate clause to mean.
It’s what a reasonable reader of the contract would give it that counts. This is consistent with the well-entrenched principles of interpretation of contracts:
There's no legal requirement to include boilerplate clauses in commercial contracts. Contracts can operate perfectly well without them. Trainee solicitors know the real value in boilerplate clauses is increasing contractual certainty.
Whether it’s appropriate to include any one (or another) boilerplate clause will depend upon the contract and what you're trying to do in the contract.
Then it's a matter of making sure the wording of the clause is suitable.
Small changes in wording to a standard boilerplate clauses can make a dramatic difference to the legal effect of the contract, as you can see from the list of examples below.
And then rarely will every boilerplate clause be required for a commercial or business contract. Often it won’t make sense to include all of them.
In some cases, boilerplate clauses remove legal rights which a party would expect to have.
Knowing what they do changes the way you read contracts to work out things such as:
They establish legal relationships in contracts with more certainty, whether for or against you.
Boilerplate clauses often appear at the end of a contract, but they don’t have to. They could be anywhere in the contract, come disguised or embedded in a long tract of text and easy to miss.
Here are the meaning of boilerplate contract clauses and what they're intended to do:
Boilerplate contracts and agreements on the other hand are pre-prepared contracts. You might call them templates.
They’re not standard terms of contract or business.
Boilerplate contracts are prepared to serve as a starting point for preparation of contract for a specific transaction. They’re edited before they’re ready for use.
That’s because very rarely are two contracts the same. Even standard terms may be prepared from a boilerplate agreement.
Boilerplate contracts are a bit like stock photography: made to meet the most popular market requirements of contracts of that sort, to sell as many as possible.
The leading providers give warnings and legal disclaimers in their own terms of business. You use them at your own risk. If something goes wrong, it's not their problem.
Boilerplate clauses on the other hand are clauses which serve as a general starting point to be used in a contract.
With many of them, it can be risky editing them without knowing what the legal effect is without knowing the reason why they’re there in the first place.
Boilerplate clauses may have one or more purposes or effects, such as:
The boilerplate clauses above are straightforward examples. These sorts of clauses can get complicated in their own right. We often find ourselves looking up decided case law to make sure the interpretation of boilerplate clauses like these hasn't changed.
There was one relatively recent change to the way Variation Clauses were read in the Supreme Court in Rock Advertising, in 2018.
So the way these clauses are read isn't static: and then they appear in different contracts with different terms, and they can have a different meaning again. How they're read depends upon the terms of the particular contract and the background facts of the case.
And the longer a contract gets, the more complicated they can become. Different parts of the contract can relate to one another in ways that you can't see clearly.
We're expert solicitors: we draft business contracts.
If you're after a hand from a specialist contract lawyer, we can help you appreciate the way contracts are interpreted and how it's going to affect the business after it is signed, or what it means now that you have signed a contract and someone is looking to enforce the contract or terminate for breach of contract.
Call us on +44 20 7036 9282 to get legal advice from a business contract lawyer.
In a variety of types of contracts one party - usually involving a supplier, agent or licensee - may hold records required to properly and accurately calculate amounts to be paid under a contract.
Without access to the records, the customer (or principal or licensor) has no objective or independent method of verifying whether issued invoices have been calculated in consistently with the contractual rights granted to the supplier.
The parties may agree that the customer has the right to inspect the underlying documentation to satisfy itself that the sums charged are correct, and in accordance with the contract terms.
The Customer may appoint a certified accountant to inspect and audit all records relating to the sale of goods and grants of licences, calculation of invoices, and the books and accounts of the Supplier at the Customer's expense at all reasonable times and on reasonable notice.
More sophisticated versions of Audit clauses contain provisions to recoup the expense of audits where the payment calculations are more than (say) 10% or more than what they should be.
By default, the costs and expenses of a party preparing a contract are payable by the party incurring them.
If precontractual statements have been made that a party will pay the costs of the other, and a provision does not appear in the contract - it's more than likely that the precontractual promise to pay will not be enforceable. Especially when a Non-reliance Clause appears in the contract.
Where there is pre-existing agreement to pay the costs or expenses leading up to signing a contract, a costs clause puts the situation beyond doubt.
The example below says that neither party will be liable for the costs or expenses of the other. It simply confirms the default position at law. And the normal practice.
Each party shall pay the costs and expenses incurred by it or it in connection with the entering into and completion of this agreement.
In international trade and commerce, quotes, estimates and payments can be made in any currency. Fixing a contractual currency and the method for resolving differences when different currencies are used reduces the prospect of disputes.
Unless otherwise stated, all quotes and estimates are made in Sterling and all estimates and payments in foreign currencies shall be deemed to be in Sterling at the exchange rate published by Reuters at the close of business on the day that the said quote or estimate was supplied or payment made.
When contracts are made and governed by English law, the language of the contract is usually English.
Sometimes a contract may be prepared in a foreign language, in language which is familiar to a native speaker of another language.
The parties are able to select the authoritative language version. The subtleties of languages and technical meanings of words may be lost or not be able to be expressed concisely in one language or another.
A master copy of a contract might be prepared and then translated for use in many different countries. Although the parties may agree that the local version of the contract applies from country to country, the parties might also choose to apply a single law to every translation. This involved two provisions:
In other situations, the contract could be written in English, and:
where English is not an official language of the country.
In cases such as these, it can be important to know which version of the contract prevails or the languages in which the services must be provided.
The parties may prefer:
A Publicity clause or Announcements clause set out to regulate what one party may say about the other in public messaging and communications.
When the existence of the contract is to be secret, or the terms of the contract are to remain confidential, they usually appear with confidentiality clauses.
[Confidentiality provisions]No announcement or information concerning this agreement or any associated matter shall be released or authorised in any advertising, publicity, promotional or other marketing activities without the prior written consent of the other party. Consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed.
The default rule is that contractual obligations cannot be assigned without the consent of the other party.
When they are, Successors and Assigns Clauses are intended to make clear that if the obligations are novated to another person, the obligations will apply to that person.
In contracts governed by English law, these clauses put it beyond doubt that the party to whom the contract is transferred will be bound by the contract.
For example, when shares are transferred to a new shareholder, the shareholder's agreement might contain a Successors and Assigns Clause, so that the new shareholder is bound by the shareholders agreement. (Note that a deed of adherence would usually be insisted upon prior to receiving an assignment of shares)
Example: Successors and Assigns clause
This agreement shall operate for the benefit of and be binding on the respective successors in title and permitted assigns of each party.
When used, it makes sense to group it with an Assignment Clause.
Parties are not entitled to suspend a performance of a contract. That's the general law.
Exceptions though may be by statute. One is s 112 of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. (aka the Construction Act 1996). That doesn't apply to most industries.
When a party suspends work without an entitlement to do so, it's likely to amount to a breach of contract, even if the other party is in breach of contract themselves.
Rights to suspend may be established in the contract itself.
Should the Customer not pay sums properly due and payable under this Agreement by the due date, the Supplier may suspend such part or parts of the Services as it sees fit on 14 days’ notice in writing to the Customer.