The Parol Evidence Rule answers the question whether or not a written contract can be amended orally at a later time.
The first point is that a written contract intended by the parties to be final and complete may not be contradicted by previous or contemporaneous written or oral evidence. In other words, one may not introduce as evidence prior drafts or discussions right up until an agreement is reached.
However, subsequent changes may be made by the parties to amend a prior written agreement. For example, you can enter into a written consulting agreement to render 20 hours a month of services. Later on, you can orally amend the agreement to increase or decrease the time spent.
In “real life”, if a dispute occurs, it may be difficult to prove that there was agreement with respect to the modifications.
Note that previous evidence can be used to prove fraud, mistake or duress.
Please answer the questions below and review your answers.
Question 20 illustrates the workings of The Parol Evidence Rule. Review the model solution carefully if you gave a wrong answer. Question 21 illustrates a common form of IQEX multiple choice question. It is basically a modified true/false question. First work with one of the columns. If you are sure the answer is, for example, “yes”, you can eliminate two of the four choices. Then look at the other column. In a worst case, you may have to guess between the two remaining choices.
By now you should begin to understand why I made the comment in my course introduction that questions tend to be repeated from year to year. The concepts don’t change, so there really is no need to re-invent the wheel by creating new questions to determine whether candidates know their material.
Time limit: 0
Quiz Summary
0 of 1 questions completed
Questions:
Information
You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Click “VIEW QUESTIONS” button to review the answers
1
Current
Review
Answered
Incorrect
Question 1 of 1
1. Question
Section 1 Q 20
Rogers and Lennon entered into a written computer consulting agreement that required Lennon to provide certain weekly reports to Rogers. The agreement also stated that Lennon would provide the computer equipment necessary to perform the services, and that Rogers’ computer would not be used. As the parties were executing the agreement, they orally agreed that Lennon could use Rogers’ computer. After executing the agreement, Rogers and Lennon orally agreed that Lennon would report on a monthly, rather than weekly, basis. The parties now disagree on Lennon’s right to use Rogers’ computer and how often Lennon must report to Rogers. ln the event of a lawsuit between the parties, the parol evidence rule will:
