Dear all

Here's a hypothetical for weekend entertainment, if nothing else.

Suppose a contract is entered into under one system of law (say the
law of New York) but is subsequently varied by agreement, so as to be
governed thereafter by a different law (say English law).

To what extent is New York law relevant context to which the Court may
have regard when interpreting the contract?

If New York law would have treated particular conduct as a breach but
English law would not or vice versa, can or should that be taken into
account by the Court in interpreting the contract in English law on
the basis that the approach of New York law formed part of the context
in which the parties reached their understanding? Would specific
evidence that the issue was understood by the parties be necessary?

Kind regards

Ger