Articles

''Best Endeavours'' or ''All Reasonable Endeavours''

Monday, August 28, 2017

What's the Difference?

Often in commercial contracts, parties agree that they will use their "best endeavours", their "reasonable endeavours" or their "all reasonable endeavours" to perform certain actions or to achieve a certain outcome.  But what do these terms mean in reality?  While there are no set definitions and much is dependent on the particular circumstances, we are able to make some practical comments about the requirements of each of these terms so you have a clear idea of what you are agreeing to.

"Reasonable Endeavours"
If a party promises to use or take "reasonable endeavours" to achieve a certain outcome, this means that a party is generally not required to take actions that might prejudice them unless they have specifically contracted to do so.  Rather than requiring a party to take every possible action, "reasonable endeavours" requires that party to take actions a reasonable person would do in the same circumstances. While a party can be expected to have an "honest try" at achieving the desired outcome, they would not usually be expected to perform tasks that may be to their detriment.

''Best Endeavours''
An obligation to use your "best endeavours" is much more onerous than to use your "reasonable endeavours".  While this is not an absolute requirement to do absolutely everything possible, it has been found that such an obligation is quite burdensome and may mean that the party contracting to use best endeavours may have to undertake everything practicably possible to fulfil its obligations even if this involves taking steps which incur financial loss (even significant loss) on their part.  However, it is important to keep in mind that the difference between incurring financial loss and having no regard for your own financial interest is quite pronounced.  

In the recent UK decision of Jet2.Com Limited 1, it was held that an airport which had a general obligation under an agreement with Jet2 – a low cost airline – to use its "best endeavours" to promote Jet2's airline gave rise to an additional obligation to allow Jet2's planes to arrive and depart outside the airport's normal operating hours, even though this would be at a financial cost to the airport.  Here the commercial circumstances are important because at the time of entering into the contract, the airport knew that Jet2 would be required to enter or to fly outside the standard times to make a profit but still agreed to use their "best endeavours" to promote Jet2's airline.  

"All Reasonable Endeavours"
It has been asserted in the past that the phrase "all reasonable endeavours" is somewhat of a middle ground between "best endeavours" and "reasonable endeavours".  However, while what is required will depend on the factual circumstances of each situation, many now consider that "all reasonable endeavours" imposes very similar potentially burdensome obligations upon that party as an obligation to use one's "best endeavours".  The addition of the word "all" has quite a substantial impact on the obligations that one party is required to perform, and therefore when conducting contractual negotiations, parties need to be aware that such a seemingly minor amendment could have dramatic implications beyond parties' control or may result in the sacrifice of that parties' financial interests.  

How to Avoid Problems
One way to avoid problems of interpretation is to make it quite clear what each party is required to do to meet their obligation by providing clear guidelines or boundaries around what is expected.  We are able to assist here, but these may include:

  • The time by which an obligation must be completed by;
  • Examples of what could be considered to be ''best'' or ''all reasonable'' endeavours;
  • Certain machinery or procedural requirements that the parties must follow; or
  • Whether the party performing the obligation is required to incur substantial financial obligation and, if so, up to a certain limit.

In all circumstances, if the intention is that a party is absolutely required to perform that obligation, then the wording should outline that they "must" do that action.  Alternatively, where some of the actions required are outside of the contracting party's control, or they may have to undergo considerable time, expense and effort to obtain that goal, then we are able to assist to ensure that the language used is toned down sufficiently so that such provision is not unjustly burdensome and reflects your understanding of the steps you will be required to undertake to complete your obligations.

Please kindly direct any enquiries to:

Andrew Knight on (09) 306 6730 (aknight@mcveaghfleming.co.nz) or
Harry Forsythe on (09) 306 6727 (hforsythe@mcveaghfleming.co.nz)

© McVeagh Fleming 2017

This article is published for general information purposes only.  Legal content in this article is necessarily of a general nature and should not be relied upon as legal advice.  If you require specific legal advice in respect of any legal issue, you should always engage a lawyer to provide that advice. 

____________________________

1    Jet2.Com Ltd
v Blackpool Airport Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 417

 

Recent Posts


Tags

Civil union Erceg v Erceg Principal Visa application Litigation Clayton case Albany Office Protector Character requirements Testamentary capacity Marriage Tamarapa v Byerley Lump sum SN v MN [2017] NZCA 289 Section 182 Family Proceedings Act 1980 SMC Creating Trusts Abuse Case Study Protection Order Section 15A Lease Health and Safety Reform Bill Charities Sale of Goods Gifts Maritime Lien Division of Functions Fair share Interpretation Act 1999 Section 29 Charity begins at home Mortgagor Expression of interest Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 Interpretation Act 1999 Lease Titles Murrell v Hamilton Commercial Property Economic disadvantage Gifting Family Protection Act 1955 Elder Law Will that do Estate Administration Limitation Act 2010 Companies Act 1993 Partnership based work visa Skilled migrant Valid wills Ilott v Mitson 2017 UKSC 17 Ministry Rest Home Subsidies Limitation defence Trust Check Up Claims against estates Resident Visa Psychological abuse Personal Properties and Securities Act 1999 Zero Hour Contracts Mortgage Trust Confidentiality Tenants Anti-money laundering (AML) Section 15 Immigration Deceased's wishes De facto Re Estate of Campbell Ministry of Social Development Wills Act 2007 Section 14 Testamentary Promises Due Diligence Ship Registration Six years Reckless Trading Family Trusts Interpretation of documents Company Law Recovery of money Document Disclosure White v White Lankow v Rose Intellectual Property Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA) Privacy Act 1993 Changes Insurance Vessel Sale and Purchase Repayment Acknowledgment KiwiSaver Administrators duty Amundson v Raos Part payment Acknowledgment of Debt Body Corporate Constructive trusts Wills Act 2007 Section 8 Property (Relationships) Act 1976 Break up Asset Protection Residential Trustee Duties Testamentary freedom Ship's Mortgage Personal Twelve years Interest Work and Income Grey Power Will Mortgagee Relationship Property Seperation Income Legislation update Wills Act 2007 Section 11 Compensation Limitation period ''Best Endeavours'' Testamentary writing Wills Loss of income Blackwell v Hollings Fair Trading Act 1986 Employment Pattern of offending Shareholders' Agreement Auckland Office Undue influence Commercial Law Skilled migrant points Vessel surveyor Invalid wills Executors duty Property Resident Ship Financial services Maritime Law Living standards Trust busting WINZ Limitation Act 1950 Wills Act 2007 Immigration New Zealand Contract Law Terms of Trade Domestic violence Unfair contract terms Landlord Physical abuse Partner of resident Temper Domestic Violence Act 1995 Verbal abuse Consumer credit contracts Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 (CCCFA) Eviction Wilson v Donnellan Business Frustration Duress Financial services provider (FSP) Commercial Subsidies Vessel survey Hawkes Bay Trustee Company Limited v Judd Financial products Re Estate of Feron Violence Financial Advisers Act 2008 Broadbent v Ministry of Social Development Charity Directors' Duties Offending Tenant Validity of Wills Trusts Bill Trusts Beneficiary Rights

Archive