Common Contract Clauses: Part 1-Module 3 of 6
See Also:
III. Common Contract Clauses: Part 1
Introduction to Contract
Clauses
One
other thing about contracts is virtually universal — and that is that the vast
majority of contracts contain a cadre of clauses that are common. In the realm
of contract drafting, these clauses are called “boilerplate.” Historically, the
term “boilerplate,” as it relates to writing, derived from the newspaper
industry. “BC” (meaning “before computers”), the newspaper industry relied on
third-party companies to supply much of its non-local and non-hard-news copy
(aka “filler”). These stories were delivered to the newspapers on metal plates
with the type already embedded to facilitate the way newspaper printing was
accomplished at the time. Because these plates resembled the metal plates that
industrial and commercial boilers were made from, newspaper printers began
calling this material “boilerplates.” By evolution, the stories embedded in the
plates came to be called “boilerplate,” as well, because the writing on the
plates largely was unoriginal. Ultimately, contract clauses that are unoriginal
in the sense that they are so similar from contract to contract came to be
called “boilerplate” clauses. What follows is a discussion of such common contract
clauses.
While contract boilerplate language can be located anywhere
in a contract, it most commonly is relegated to the end of the contract and
many times is preceded by a heading labeling it as “General Provisions” or
“Miscellaneous” or the like. It is very important to note, however, that just
because the boilerplate language commonly is located at the end of the document
and given a label such as “Miscellaneous,” does
not mean it is somehow lesser in importance than any other language in the
contract. It can be extremely important and has been the subject of countless
court decisions.[1]
The “boilerplate” quite easily can spell the difference in winning or losing a
contract dispute; i.e., all contract language is important.
Until fairly recently, the language of contracts (at least the boilerplate provisions) was not thought to be copyrightable, but there has been some litigation over whether contract language can be “owned” via the Copyright Act.[2] Boilerplate clauses are not contained in contracts in any certain order, though patterns will be noted if enough contracts are read. Here they will be listed in alphabetical order of the title of the clause. They can read any number of ways and very often are quite specific to the contract at hand despite being located in the boilerplate section.
Common
Boilerplate Clauses
How many and which boilerplate provisions are contained in
a given contract depends entirely on the sophistication level of the contract
and the type of contract. The following set of boilerplate provisions is more
or less comprehensive. In practice, most contract drafters have all these
provisions in a single computer file and select them for inclusion and precise
wording based on the particular contract they are drafting and the negotiations
on these subjects by the parties, which can be quite intense (again,
notwithstanding their location in the boilerplate).
Note: Most contract language is written in stark terms and declarative sentences, and much contract language is written as prohibitions. But that does not mean such language cannot be changed. Simply put, if the parties contracted to do or not to do “X” in the original agreement, they, by future agreement, can contract to change how “X” is handled and to any degree — or to simply do away with the subject of “X” altogether — and nothing written in the agreement itself can overcome this right of the parties. A really good example of this is where contracts state in a boilerplate provision that the agreement cannot be altered orally. With perhaps an exception or two, every state supreme court in the U.S. has ruled that, notwithstanding such language, the parties to a contract may agree to change the contract, including orally (or by the behavior of the parties during performance). The point here is that contract language does not become sacrosanct once written regardless of what the contract might say. This idea should be kept in mind when reading and considering the following boilerplate provisions. Unavoidably, there is some overlap among all these provisions.
Alternative Dispute
Resolution
Alternative Dispute Resolution.
Contracting parties, of course, ordinarily desire that the contract be
performed flawlessly by both sides, but provision often is made concerning what
is to be done should the parties have a disagreement concerning the contract.
“ADR” means some procedure in lieu of or at least preceding actual litigation
(the filing of a lawsuit, etc.). The parties could agree to first try
mediation, whereby a third-party neutral is hired to facilitate, if possible,
the resolution of the dispute between the parties. Should mediation fail, the
parties then could resort to some form of arbitration whereby a third-party
neutral is hired to hear the dispute (as, in effect, a private judge) and make
a final, binding, non-appealable decision. “Non-appealable” is a bit of a
stretch because there are a few narrow grounds on which an appeal from an
arbitration award can be taken. One of those grounds is arbitrability; i.e., whether it was proper to arbitrate
the case at all.
In Southwinds Express Construction LLC v. D.H.
Griffin of Texas, Inc., 513 S.W.3d 66 (Ct. of App.—Houston 2016), the
contract between the parties indicated that Griffin,
unilaterally, could eschew mediation in favor of arbitration where, in Griffin’s view, mediation would not be
fruitful. When Griffin filed an arbitration claim in Houston through the
American Arbitration Association, Southwinds
objected to arbitration, arguing that Griffin could not unilaterally eschew
mediation in favor of arbitration, even though the parties had expressly agreed
to the same in their contract, because mediation was a “condition precedent” to
arbitration and that Griffin’s agreement in the contract was illusory if
Griffin could decide on its own not to mediate. The arbitrator ruled against Southwinds on the issue and arbitrated
the case. After the arbitration award, which was in favor of Griffin, Griffin filed suit in a Houston district court for purposes of
reducing the arbitration award to judgment. Southwinds
objected on the basis that arbitration had been improper because no mediation
had first occurred. After written
arguments, the trial court disagreed, affirmed the arbitration award, and
granted judgment to Griffin. From
that decision, Southwinds appealed to
the 14th Court of Appeals in Houston, which affirmed the lower court
ruling stating: “Having concluded that the arbitration provision was not
illusory, we further agree with the trial court’s conclusion that, under the
plain language of the parties’ agreement allowing Griffin the option to bypass mediation
(emphasis supplied by the court), mediation was not a condition precedent to
arbitration for Griffin.”
Sample ADR clause: In the event a dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement is not resolved through the negotiations of the parties, the dispute shall be submitted at any time by either party to mediation conducted through the National Arbitration Forum and its mediation rules then in effect. Should the dispute not be resolved through mediation, the dispute shall be submitted at any time post-mediation by either party to binding, non-appealable arbitration conducted through the National Arbitration Forum and its arbitration rules then in effect. The arbitration award may be reduced to final judgment in any court having jurisdiction of the subject matter.
Assignment and
Attachments
Assignment and
Subcontracting. Generally, the parties to an agreement are contracting with
precisely whom they wish to contract, and they do not want the other party to
have the unfettered ability to substitute a third party for itself, by way of
assignment or subcontracting or in any other way. Sometimes it is not allowed
at all; sometimes it is allowed but only with express permission. If any such
permission is granted, generally the assignee or subcontractor must agree to
the terms of the original agreement. The exception to this is that, often, the
party receiving income under the contract is allowed, without the requirement
of requesting permission, to assign to a third party the right to receive the
income (such as pledging the income against a loan). On the other hand,
sometimes the right to assign the right to receive the income to a third party
is prohibited unless the party making the payments agrees to the assignment.
In Kehoe v. Kehoe-Berge Coal Company, 130
A.2d 165 (Penn. 1957), the contract prohibited rights assignment without the
obligor’s permission. The original obligee nonetheless assigned his payment
rights to a third party, who then assigned the rights to another third party,
who then assigned them even to a further third party. Through all these
assignments, the obligor, notwithstanding the contract language, kept paying
the obligation. Eventually, the original obligee, in a dubious twist of logic,
sued the obligor for making all those payments without expressly granting
itself the permission to do so. The appellate court adopted the decision of the
lower court, quoting that court: “In making the assignment, the [original
obligee] disregarded the plain terms of the contract and is not now in position
to repudiate his act by objecting to the action of the [obligor] in treating
the assignment as valid [by not objecting to the assignment]. When [the
obligee] executed the assignment and [the obligor] recognized the same as valid
and pursuant thereto made the payments called for in the contract to the
assignee, the contract as between the [obligee and obligor] was terminated, and
[the obligee] cannot now maintain an action thereon.”
Sample
assignment and subcontracting clause: Neither party may
assign this Agreement without the express written permission of the other
party, which permission shall not be withheld unreasonably. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, payments due or to become due under this Agreement may be assigned
by the receiving party at its discretion. The work to be performed under this
Agreement may not be subcontracted to a third party or third parties without
the express written permission of the other party, which permission shall not
be withheld unreasonably. Any permitted contract of assignment or permitted
subcontract shall contain express provisions binding the assignee or
subcontractor to all of the relevant terms and conditions of this Agreement as
context would dictate.
Attachments,
Schedules and Exhibits. Often, contracts refer to “attachments” or
“schedules” or “exhibits” (collectively, here, “Exhibits”). These terms are
largely interchangeable. Exhibits are “attached” at the very end of the
contract after the signature lines (and notary seals, if any). They may contain
minute data (e.g., software code) or
long lists (e.g., songs being
conveyed by a songwriter to a music publisher) or legal descriptions of
multiple real properties being conveyed. Normally, in the body of the contract
where an Exhibit is referenced, there will be language such as this: “…attached
as Exhibit A, which exhibit is hereby made a part of this Agreement for all
purposes.” In contracts with multiple exhibits, this language can be expressed
in the boilerplate section. Regardless of where located, it is done to avoid
ambiguity due to the fact that the exhibits come after the signature lines. One
issue that can result from an after-signatures document is whether the language
in that document is enforceable under the agreement to which the document is
attached. Language should be included in the agreement that makes it clear that
the language in the after-signatures document forms a part of the agreement (if
that is the intention of the parties). Sometimes the main document will
reference the attachment but not specifically state that its language is meant
to be enforceable under the main document; that can be problematic.
In Thurman v. Wood Grp. Prod. Servs. (E.D.
La. 2010), the Court ruled that the attachment at issue was a part of the main
agreement by its physical attachment to the main document and the fact that the
main document referenced the attachment even though the main document did not
indicate expressly that the attachment was a part of the main document. The
Court also looked to the intent of the parties and found that the parties’
intent was to include the attachment as a part of the main agreement. Many other
courts have decided this issue differently on these facts.
Sample attachments, schedules, and exhibits clause: All
attachments, schedules, and exhibits (collectively, Exhibits) referred to in
this Agreement are hereby made a part of this Agreement for all purposes. Any
and all changes to the Exhibits at any time subsequent to the full execution of
this Agreement by the parties shall comply with the provision of this Agreement
relating specifically to amending this Agreement.
Collection and
Attorney Fees/Costs. Where a contract requires payment from one party to the
other that has not been timely made or where there has been a successful
lawsuit by one party against the other concerning some contract issue, the
non-breaching or prevailing party naturally wants to collect such monies and be
reimbursed its costs. This process usually involves the services of an
attorney, so the collecting or suing party wants the other party not only to
pay the principal amount and any associated interest that has accrued but also
to pay the cost of collection or suit — attorney fees, court costs, and other actual
and reasonable costs of collection. Generally, costs are collectable. In some
jurisdictions, attorney fees are not recoverable in all circumstances; in
others, they are recoverable generally, and in still others they are recoverable
but only at the court’s discretion. In any event, contract drafters generally
will attempt to cover all these bases. Many contracts call for the “prevailing
party” to be entitled to attorney fees.
In Benchmark Builders, Inc. v. Schultz, 294 Ga. 12, 751 S.E.2d 45 (Ga. 2013), the construction company that built a home sued the homeowners for unpaid monies and the homeowners counterclaimed seeking various types of damages. The jury found that the homeowners were not liable to the builder and that the builder was liable to the homeowners, but the jury awarded no damages at all; however, the jury did award attorney’s fees to the homeowners. The trial court granted judgment in that amount, and the builder appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed, as did the Supreme Court. The contract between the parties stated: “If any action at law or in equity...is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees from the other party, which fees may be set by the court in the trial or appeal of such action or may be enforced in a separate action brought for that purpose and which fees shall be in addition to any other relief which may be awarded (emphasis supplied by court).” The Court agreed with the homeowners that the specific language of their agreement permitted the award of attorney’s fees even where no other damages were awarded because the homeowners had prevailed on liability and because the contract phrase “may be awarded” did not require other damages actually to be awarded.
Collection and Enforcement
Sample
collection and attorney fees/costs clause: In the
event the party to this Agreement who is to receive funds from the other party
pursuant to this Agreement does not timely receive all or any part of said
funds and the non-receiving party chooses to employ an attorney in the
collection thereof, the non-paying party hereby agrees to pay the non-receiving
party’s actual and reasonable attorney fees and costs of collection. In the
event there is any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this
Agreement or to the interpretation, breach or enforcement thereof and any
action or proceeding is commenced in relation thereto, the prevailing party
shall be entitled to its actual and reasonable attorney fees and costs from the
non-prevailing party.
Compliance with Law and Regulations. In
some situations, one party to an agreement is quite interested in the other
party to the Agreement complying with all laws and regulations relating to the
performance of the agreement. A very good example is where an owner has signed
an agreement with a contractor to demolish a building. Pursuant to permission
granted to it by the owner, the contractor enters into various subcontractor agreements
in relation to the project. One of those subcontracts could be for asbestos
abatement. It is vitally important to the owner and the contractor that the
subcontractor comply with all laws (federal and state) and regulations (federal
and state) relating to, for example, environmental concerns because the owner
and the contractor could be held liable by federal and/or state authorities for
the noncompliance of the subcontractor.
Sometimes,
one party to a contract-based lawsuit will want to hold the other party liable
for not complying with certain laws or regulations where the contract itself
does not require the same. The question is whether such requirements can be
implied. In Devona v. Zeitels (D. Mass., 2016), the court ruled: “As to the
dispute over FDA compliance, it is undisputed that the Agreement contains no
provision obligating DeVona to maintain Endocraft in compliance with FDA
regulations. The Agreement is unambiguous as to DeVona’s FDA compliance
obligations; the obligation is simply not present in the Agreement,” meaning
that unstated requirements concerning compliance with law and regulations would
not be implied by the court.
Sample
compliance with law and regulations clause: The
party to this Agreement receiving compensation for the performance of this
Agreement expressly agrees to comply with all laws and regulations
relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, keep records evidencing such
compliance, provide such records of compliance to the other
party on the other party’s reasonable request, and notify the other
party when at any time and within a reasonable time thereof it becomes
aware of any allegation of noncompliance or suggestion of noncompliance or
inquiry concerning noncompliance by any federal or state regulatory agency.
Conflicts of
Interest and Fraud. In this context, conflicts of interest involve one
party to a contract being in the position of having to choose between fidelity
to the other party in that agreement or fidelity to its own self-interest. An
example might be where a consulting company is contracted with by an owner to
choose objectively from a group of general contractor bidders but where the
consulting company turns out to have a financial interest in one of the bidders
(it may not have known the conflict would arise when it accepted the
contractual assignment). When the conflict arises, the party with the conflict,
under relevant boilerplate language, has the responsibility of disclosing the
conflict to the other party such that the conflict can be avoided or the
agreement terminated. Where disclosure is not made and the company in whom the
financial interest exists gets the bid (especially when it was not the lowest
bidder or the highest-quality bidder), the non-disclosing party could be
committing civil fraud against the other party and could be liable for damages
and subject to injunctive relief. Breach of contract for fraud and conflict of
interest can occur without language to that effect in the agreement itself, but
having the language in the agreement has distinct advantages, such as making it
clear that the non-breaching party has a particular interest in not being the
victim of such actions by the other party.
In Victory Lane v.
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, 409 F.Supp.2d 773 (S.D. Miss. 2006),
the court allowed a cause of action for fraud and conflict of interest to
proceed to trial on the theory that they constituted a breach of fiduciary duty
because the defendant knew or reasonably should have known of the conflict.
Sample conflicts of interest and fraud clause: Each party represents and warrants that it has no business, professional, personal, or other interest that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of its obligations under this Agreement and that if any such actual or potential conflict of interest arises during the term of this Agreement, the party experiencing the actual or potential conflict of interest immediately shall inform the other party in writing of such conflict. If, in the reasonable judgment of the party so notified, such conflict poses a material conflict to and with the performance of the notifying party’s obligations under this Agreement, then the notified party may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice to the notifying party; such termination of this Agreement shall be effective ten (10) days after the receipt of such notice by the notifying party. Should a conflict of interest go undisclosed, the non-disclosing party shall be liable in civil fraud to the other party for all damages, including attorney fees and costs, suffered as a result of the non-disclosed conflict of interest and the non-disclosing party shall be subject to injunctive relief in favor of the other party.
Miscellaneous Clauses
Counterparts. Given the role of electronic devices and
systems in the modern world of commerce and the desired speed of transactions,
it is not always realistic to conclude a negotiated agreement with a single,
original document containing the original signatures of all the parties (and
notaries, if applicable). So the remedy for this conundrum is to have
boilerplate language that does away with the requirement of original signatures
on a single document, replacing that construct with the idea that as long as
the document is exactly the same, there can be as many “counterparts” as
necessary, i.e., as few as one
signature per document. This idea took a while to gain acceptance but is
universally accepted today. Of course, when a party is looking to avoid its
obligations under a purported contract, it will look to any and every provision
of the contract that might invalidate the contract, such as the provision
allowing the contract to be signed in counterparts.
In Bohlen Industries
of North America, Inc. v. Flint Oil & Gas, Inc., 483 N.Y.S.2d 529, 106
A.D.2d 909 (N.Y.A.D. 1984), the parties were negotiating a settlement agreement
to the underlying contract. The settlement agreement contained a provision
stating: “This document may be signed in several counterparts, all of which
when attached together shall constitute a single, complete agreement.” Per that
provision, all of the parties signed the settlement agreement and that fact was
announced to all the parties but copies of the various counterparts were not
delivered to the parties or “attached together.” On that basis, one of the
parties argued that the settlement agreement never was effectuated. The court
ruled that actual delivery of an executed agreement to each party was not
essential for the contract to be effective unless the contract itself stated
that the executed contract was invalid unless delivered to all the parties.
Sample
counterparts clause: This
Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts with each such
counterpart deemed to be an original instrument; all such counterparts together
shall constitute one and the same agreement.
Data Protection.
The U.S. Data Protection Act of 1998 and other laws have had a profound impact
on the collection, use, and transfer of personal information about individuals
by companies, organizations, and government entities. By no means do all
contracts require a data protection clause. Given the complexity of the issue
and the length of data protection “clauses,” there will be no general
discussion of it here. “Clauses” is enclosed in quotations marks because
contract language concerning data protection requires a great deal more space
than a clause. Readers of this writing are encouraged to study independently
the idea of the inclusion of data protection language in contracts.
Sample
data protection clause: See above paragraph.