QUESTION
I would like a definitive answer on an interpretation of the following exclusion please:
"Loss resulting from ingestion or entry of any foreign object into any agricultural implement or machine (eg. harvester)."
Does this mean agricultural implements AND agricultural machines or does 'agricultural' ONLY apply to implements and ALL machines are
excluded (despite example given being clearly an agricultural machine)?
EXPERT ANSWER: Crossley Gates, Glaistor Keegan
A court must interpret the words used in a contract objectively, based on their definitions and context.
It is common drafting to not repeat adjectives unnecessarily, otherwise the phrase becomes too wordy. So, the phrase 'any agricultural implement or machine' is likely to be interpreted the same as 'any agricultural implement or agricultural machine'.
It is just a shorthand way of saying the same thing.
This interpretation is supported by:
1. An implement is a tool that is different to a machine. It seems unlikely, without clear words, that the need for it to be agricultural only applies to the tool, but not the machine.
2. The example given is only agricultural.
