Three mistakes to avoid when drafting defined terms

Drafting

I remember the difficulties I had in drafting defined terms for contracts in drafting class.

I tried to be as precise as possible.

I fretted over where to place (“[defined term]”) in a contract. The meaning might change depending on where I put (“[defined term]”) within a sentence.

In actual practice, we rarely draft contracts from scratch. There are usually precedents to refer to. However, oversights or mistakes may also arise due to reliance on precedents.
***
Three mistakes to avoid when drafting defined terms in contracts:

1. Definitions that are overly generic.

E.g. “Products” means products which are supplied by Party A to Party B under this agreement.

The problem with the above overly generic defined term is that a reader would not have any clue what products are being supplied under the agreement.

An alternative (which I think is a better way) would be to define the products with detailed description set out in a schedule to the agreement.

2. Same subject matter being defined more than once in an agreement.

E.g. In the recital of the agreement, it is stated that Party A would supply …. (“Products”) to Party B.

“Products” is defined again in the definition section of the agreement but with some variations to the definition of “Products” in the recital.

Are you confused yet as to what “Products” are being supplied by Party A which is the subject matter of the agreement?

3. Not defining the term used.

E.g. The agreement may be terminated if there is a change in Control of either party.

You search through the entire agreement, but “Control” is not defined.

Does “Control” in the agreement mean 33% or more of voting shares in a party (as referred in the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007), or more than 50% of voting shares, which allow for the passing of an ordinary resolution?

If “Control” is not defined, how would the parties determine whether the termination clause is triggered whenever there is a change in the shareholding in either party?

What other mistakes relating to defined terms do you usually encounter?

#malaysiancorporatelawyer
#contractdrafting

First posted on Linkedin on 26 November 2021.

Linkedin Post
Conversation on W&I Insurance in M&A Transactions

As an M&A lawyer with a keen interest in the nuances of the M&A field, I’ve observed that warranty and indemnity insurance (W&I) is not that common in M&A transactions in Malaysia, as far as I know. Therefore, when I saw Martijn de Lange of BMS Group commenting about W&I …

Company Law
Indirect Substantial Shareholder

A person can be a substantial shareholder in a company without directly holding any shares in that company. One of the challenges that often arises when I work on IPOs or other equity capital market exercises is the assessment of whether an individual holds an indirect substantial shareholding in a …

Company Law
Legal Requirements for Directors’ Fees and Benefits in Malaysia

One common issue I encounter in both M&A deals and IPO exercises relates to compliance with the legal requirements for the payment of director’s fees and benefits. Additionally, the legal obligations regarding director’s service contracts should not be overlooked. Here are the key points: Constitution 1. If a company, whether public …