Skip to main content

The BUSKLAW December Newsletter: Consider a Legal Audit of Your Contracts

Most of you are business professionals and thus are involved with contracts. Depending on the nature of your enterprise, you have various contracts in force, for example: 

>sales agreements
>purchase agreements
>real estate leases
>purchase order terms and conditions
>software license and maintenance agreements
>service agreements
>equipment maintenance agreements
>consulting agreements
>contractor agreements
>employment agreements
>non-disclosure agreements
>non-compete agreements
>transportation or logistics agreements
>financial institution agreements

Perhaps you work with these documents on a regular basis and are familiar with their content. Or you pay a high-priced law firm to do that for you. More commonly, however, you keep these documents in a file cabinet, rarely review them, and only call your expensive big-firm lawyer when there are problems with the transaction. Whatever the case, consider the advisability of a legal audit to focus on the following:
  • Are your contracts properly signed, dated, and legible to the reader? I once had a client who had the other party sign its contracts but never signed them itself, thinking that if something went wrong, it could argue that it never agreed to the contract. This is a poor - and fruitless - approach to contract administration. And I once had a judge refuse to admit an opposing party's contract into evidence because the text was unreadable. 
  • Are your contracts still in force or have they (intentionally or not) expired? Do you know the steps to renew (or terminate) them?
  • Do you have multiple contracts with the same party that may conflict with each other? You may have a master agreement and an operating agreement, a term sheet, or a statement of work with an outside party. But if you don't carefully specify what agreement controls, you may find yourself in a court battle as my colleague D.C. Toedt discusses here.
  • Do your contracts contain ambiguous and confusing legal jargon? Examples of legal jargon (and suggested remedies) are discussed in this article that I wrote for the Michigan Bar Journal. Legal jargon is more than a nuisance; it can lead to costly litigation about what the parties intended. And there are no excuses for legal jargon, as my colleague Michael Braem and I point out in a recently-published Michigan Bar Journal article.
  • Do you have a contract management system? The system can be as a simple as a table or spreadsheet or as complex as an enterprise software solution. But due diligence demands that you keep track of your contracts, including key provisions, expiration dates, and renewal deadlines.
  • Finally, do you have a corporate records retention policy (with a designated record retention manager) that requires the preservation of your contracts for the proper period? If not, you could get in trouble for destruction of evidence if you discard a contract that is (or becomes) the subject of a lawsuit.
The purpose of a legal audit is quite simple: find potential problems with your contracts now and fix them before they can lead to a costly and time-consuming legal dispute. 
A legal audit of your contracts makes sense even if you already have an established relationship with a lawyer who may have prepared your contracts. The old adage that "two heads are better than one" makes good sense here. And my view is that even experienced corporate lawyers conducting a legal audit for their clients shouldn't "get rich" in the process but instead charge a reasonable fixed fee largely based on the number of contracts reviewed. (You'll recall that my approach to practicing law is stated here.)

So as you are getting in the holiday spirit with inspirational music and stories of Xmas long ago, consider a legal audit of your contracts as an appropriate "gift" to your bottom line.   
________________________________________

If you find this post worthwhile, please consider sharing it with your colleagues. The link to this blog is www.busklaw.blogspot.com and my website is www.busklaw.comThanks!  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The BUSKLAW 2021 Year in Review - Brit English Sums It Up!

  I'm at a loss to describe 2021 using American English, sorry. AmE has grown tiresome. Don't believe me? Just turn on your local TV news and listen for how many times the news people use "prior" instead of "before" and pepper their speech with "as well," frequently tacking it on after using "also" in the same sentence, as in "It will also rain tomorrow as well." How can all be WELL when every other sentence ends with AS WELL? Warning: don't play a drinking game to count the number of  AS WELLs or you'll be pished (as they say in Scotland) in 10 minutes. Which reminds me of why we should be thankful for Brit English to describe 2021: it was another year that we good guys got knackered .   Consider: Covid continues unabated - now improved with variants (get your booster, wear a mask)! The peaceful transition of the U.S. government after the 2020 presidential election almost didn't happen (can you say "insurrectio...

The BUSKLAW Halloween 2022 Post: Stephen King's Asides on Poor Writing in Fairy Tale

  Having just read  Stephen King's Fairy Tale in time for Halloween, it's appropriate to examine his asides on poor writing included in the book. (BTW, Fairy Tale is a good read with King's typical well-executed character development, plot, and a great finish to the story. But you have like the whole Grimm fairy tale genre before you read his take on it.)  Stephen King doesn't tolerate anything less than crisp prose. When the story's hero, Charlie Reade, tries to read a book about the origins of fantasy and its place in the world matrix ("what a mouthful"), he can only scan it because: It was everything I hated about what I thought of as "hoity-toity" academic writing, full of five-dollar words and tortured syntax. Maybe that's intellectual laziness on my part, but maybe not. Later on, Charlie tries to focus on a particular chapter in the "origins of fantasy" book about the story of Jack and the Beanstalk but is put off by "t...

The BUSKLAW May Newsletter: The Foolhardy Practice of Using Faux Terms of Art in Your Contracts

  Most lawyers draft contracts. That's what lawyers do. And they use perceived terms of art ("TOAs") because they want to be paragons of contract-drafting precision. But here is where the canker gnaws:  the words that lawyers insert in their contracts as TOAs are actually not, potentially causing problems in clarity and interpretation. And as I've said time and again, these problems lead to disputes, and disputes lead to litigation, which is always time-consuming and expensive for the parties involved.  Let's first define TOAs in the legal context. According to Professor Bryan Garner in his Dictionary of Legal Usage , TOAs have specific, precise meanings that are "locked tight" and based on legal precedent. But then there are the faux TOAs, "whose meanings are often unhinged." Expert contract drafters, Garner says, know that clear, simple drafting is less subject to misinterpretation than using TOAs that are nothing more than "mere jargon....