Another area in which you believe that pre-contract fraud is sufficient to terminate an integration clause is the review of actual expenses compared to those promised before the agreement was signed. Some courts have held that a party who knew or should have known about future expenses may have committed fraud if these expenses were undervalued during contract negotiations. The final contract contained a full contractual clause. Shoreline argued that this clause had prevented Mears from availing itself of the pre-contract agreement. However, Akenhead J noted that „the full agreement clause“ does not exclude or limit confidence in an established and effective Estoppel, either explicitly or by interpretation. It was found that prior to the start of the contract, the parties shared an assumption and based on this assumption over a long period of time, so it would be unfair to allow Shoreline to apply the terms of the contract in order to avoid the performance of their obligations under the pre-contract agreement. What do we do if we discover a late integration clause that prevents the court from fully understanding the agreement between the parties? How do we escape? The first question is: who wrote the contract? And did our camp have bargaining power? Courts such as the Delaware Federal Court have strengthened the integration clauses contained in a „formal written contract between demanding parties.“ This agreement, as well as the transaction documents, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties on all matters covered in this agreement. The contracting parties acknowledge that this agreement was negotiated on the basis: it becomes more difficult for you to argue that you must have received certain products and services described in the sale process if they are not specified in the final agreement and both parties agree that the contract constitutes the whole agreement between the parties. One way to reduce this risk is to insist that the supplier`s sales and marketing materials be included in the underlying agreement.
3. Correction – A third limitation of a full clause of the contract is that it cannot be invoked to prevent the correction of a unilateral or common error in circumstances where a contract is not a real representation of what has actually been agreed by the parties. Therefore, if you wish to introduce extrinsic evidence into a contractual dispute, if an integration clause prohibits you from entering into it, you should check whether there was a misrepresentation that influenced your party to sign the underlying agreement. „This letter includes and must be the definitive expression of the parties` agreement and is a complete and exclusive statement of applicable terms and conditions, which replaces all prior agreements or assurances, written or written, as well as any other oral or written communication between the parties regarding the purpose of this agreement.“ If you have to deal with customer dissatisfaction with the terms of the contract, you work with your client team to help them document any proposed changes to the agreement that may incorporate certain aspects of the original agreement, while other aspects are modified.