This lease rider form may be used when you are involved in a lease transaction, and in the event of a conflict or inconsistency between the printed terms of this Lease and added terms of the Lease, the added terms shall control and be deemed to supersede the printed terms of the Lease.
Arizona Conflicts Between Printed Form and Added Terms refer to legal disputes that arise in contractual agreements when there is a conflict between pre-printed terms on a standard form and additional terms added later by one party. These conflicts often occur when the parties involved have used redrafted contracts or forms as the basis for their agreement and have added supplementary terms or amendments to the original terms. In Arizona, these conflicts are governed by the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) under Article 2, which deals with the sale of goods. The UCC provides guidelines to determine the resolution of conflicts between printed form terms and added terms in contracts. There are two primary types of conflicts that may arise in Arizona Conflicts Between Printed Form and Added Terms: 1. Conflicts between contradictory terms: This occurs when the printed form terms and added terms directly contradict each other. For example, the printed form may state that payment is due within 30 days, while the added term specifies payment within 15 days. Resolving such conflicts requires determining the intent of the parties and applying the rules of contract interpretation. 2. Conflicts between additional terms and gaps in the printed form: This type of conflict arises when the added terms address matters not covered by the printed form. For instance, the printed form may not include provisions for warranties, but the added terms include specific warranty terms. In such cases, the added terms usually prevail as they provide more specific details on the subject, filling the gaps left by the printed form. When determining the resolution of Arizona Conflicts Between Printed Form and Added Terms, the UCC sets forth a hierarchy of rules: 1. Express terms: Express terms added by the parties usually take precedence over pre-printed terms. If the parties have explicitly negotiated and added a term to the contract, it is presumed to be the agreed-upon term, even if it contradicts the pre-printed terms. 2. Course of dealing, usage of trade, or course of performance: If there is no express agreement between the parties regarding a particular term, the UCC allows consideration of the parties' prior dealings or industry practices resolving conflicts. This is particularly relevant when interpreting ambiguous terms or bridging any gaps left by the printed form. 3. Exclusion of terms by agreement or objection: The UCC allows parties to exclude or modify the applicability of conflicting pre-printed terms through explicit agreement or objection. If one party raises an objection to a specific term, it may result in that term being excluded from the contract, even if it is part of the printed form. 4. Good faith: Throughout the resolution process, the UCC emphasizes the obligation of both parties to act in good faith. Good faith requires honesty, fairness, and conformity to reasonable commercial standards. Courts will consider whether each party acted in good faith when interpreting and applying conflicting terms. In summary, Arizona Conflicts Between Printed Form and Added Terms involve disputes that arise when there are contradictions or gaps between pre-printed terms and additional terms added to a contract. Resolving these conflicts requires careful interpretation, considering the intent of the parties, industry practices, prior dealings, and the principles outlined in the UCC. Parties should always seek legal advice to understand their rights and obligations in such situations.
