For example: “. All lots which have not been released within the aforementioned period shall be resold by public or private sale … ” can be replaced by “. All lots that have not been released within the aforementioned period may be resold by public or private sale. [4] Why don`t lawyers write in the present tense? One explanation is that the lawyer believes that she is writing for the future and therefore should write about things as if they would happen in the future! But this is a false premise. The usual rule of interpretation is that a document speaks constantly. And if a document is read in the future (for example, if its conditions are implemented), the future will be present at that time! It is therefore more logical to shoot in the present tense and get rid of unnecessary flows that confuse the meaning. For example: “. Motorplus Ltd refers a number of claims [of a specified nature] to PM Law Ltd Solicitors … ” can be replaced by “. Motorplus Ltd intends to refer a number of claims [of a specified nature] to PM Law Ltd.`s lawyers.”[5] This is also the interpretation and intent of the “shall” API. “Should” is simply a recommendation. Whether the interpretation and definition of IPA would hold up in court is another question. Take a typical clause in an agreement that usually reads: “This agreement shall be governed by the laws of India.” If “shall” is understood as “has the duty to”, the sentence would read as follows: “This Agreement has the duty to be governed by the laws of India”.

The intended meaning is not to impose an obligation, but to establish a fact. When I asked the question, why not just say, “This agreement is governed by Indian law”? I was told to just follow the rule – be king! This has more to do with how the word “shall” was used in this case, “since the language of the law is reasonably open to divergent interpretations.” He does not seem to conclude that they would decide in the same way if there is a clear interpretation. Black`s Law Dictionary lists the following five meanings of shall: For example: “If the tenant must notify the landlord six months in advance and pay the rent before the date of termination…” ” can be replaced by: “If the tenant. and pays the rent… In other words, a good draftsman always expresses the same idea in the same way and always expresses different ideas differently. And it ensures that every recurring word or phrase has been used consistently. With a few minor exceptions (i.e., when used to actually describe a duty of the first person submitting the verb), the use of “shall” in the language of the law violates these basic principles. Consider this sentence: “The rental period begins with the beginning of the last of the … Now replace shall with one of the other verbs mentioned above. In its original meaning, “shall” was used to imply an obligation – and it is only in this sense that legal linguists recommend its use and advocate its subsequent use.

• The revised U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure – without any debit Australia`s Corporate Tax Act 2009 does not contain a “shall” in its substantive provisions. [3] According to PLAIN, a U.S. federal government task force that promotes the use of plain language, the reference book Words and Phrases® | Legal Solutions ( contains more than 76 pages summarizing the United States. Case law on cases where the ambiguous use of the word “shall” in contracts has played an important role (should and should | In the above sentence, each time is replaced by must, will, can, should, or a combination of words, the sentence still makes sense, and it is impossible to determine what interpretation the author intended. Unless the reader is explicitly told that it should be interpreted as mandatory – and not as specific, i.e. the author is only making a recommendation or even a request – it is ambiguous and can give rise to litigation.