Oxanda Childcare v MAAG [2018] VSC 370
This case (at [36]) reinforces that ‘and’ and ‘or’ are to be given their ordinary meanings unless context indicates otherwise. The defendant argued that the proper construction of a lease termination clause required ‘and’ to be read as ‘or’ for the contract to make commercial sense. The court held that the leasing context and consistent use of ‘and’ and ‘or’ throughout the lease defeated this argument.
As Episode 15 discusses, the words ‘and’ and ‘or’ all but invariably take their ordinary meanings, given the clearly understood distinction between them15. iTip – ‘or’ is a form of disjunctive and creates alternatives >>> interpretation 101, Episode 37.
This case is from Episode 39 of interpretationNOW!
Footnotes: