This is simply a short statement that states that, in the event of a conflict between the provisions of one Article and the terms and conditions contained in prior Articles provided for in the Agreement, the parties agree that the provisions of a designated Article shall prevail.
North Dakota Conflict of Terms refers to a legal concept that arises when there is an inconsistency or conflict between different terms or provisions in a contract or legal document in the state of North Dakota, United States. It is essential to understand and address this conflict to ensure clarity, enforceability, and fairness of the agreement. In North Dakota, a Conflict of Terms can occur in various contexts, such as contracts, agreements, statutes, regulations, or any legal document. Different types of North Dakota Conflict of Terms may include: 1. Contractual Conflict of Terms: This type of conflict arises when there are contradictory or inconsistent terms within a contract. It can involve conflicting clauses, provisions, conditions, or obligations, leading to uncertainty or ambiguity. 2. Statutory Conflict of Terms: When two or more statutes or regulations conflict with each other in North Dakota, it creates a statutory conflict. This conflict may occur due to different laws addressing the same subject or provisions of different statutes contradicting each other. 3. Conflicts in Case Law: In some instances, conflicts may arise in North Dakota due to conflicting interpretations or decisions made by different courts concerning similar issues or legal questions. Resolving these conflicts is crucial for ensuring consistent legal precedents and predictability in the judicial system. 4. Conflict of Terms in Administrative Regulations: Administrative regulations are rules or requirements issued by governmental agencies. When there is an inconsistency or conflict between various regulations or provisions established by different agencies or within the same agency, it leads to a conflict of terms that needs resolution. Resolving conflicts of terms is essential to avoid confusion and to ensure fairness in legal agreements. In North Dakota, courts may employ various methods to address such conflicts, such as: a. Prioritizing Specific Provisions: Courts may interpret the contract or legal document to give priority to certain provisions over others based on the intent of the parties or the importance of the terms involved. b. Severability: If certain conflicting terms can be separated without undermining the overall agreement's purpose, courts may enforce the remaining non-conflicting provisions. c. Supremacy of Law: When a conflict arises between a statute or regulation and a contract provision, the law generally prevails. Courts will seek to harmonize the provisions to the extent possible or rely on the legislative intent behind the conflicting statute. d. Plain Meaning Rule: The court may interpret conflicting terms based on their plain and ordinary meaning, focusing on the language used, overall context, and the intent of the parties involved. It is important for individuals, businesses, and legal professionals in North Dakota to be aware of the concept of North Dakota Conflict of Terms and the potential types of conflicts that may arise. Understanding these conflicts and their resolution methods can help ensure clarity, enforceability, and fairness in legal agreements across various domains.
