Home Maxims & Terms Interpretation and characterization meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Interpretation and characterization

Interpretation and characterization legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2017 SCMR 1734 SUPREME-COURT-OF-CANADA Judicial Precedent
Interpretation and characterizationPrinciplesIntention of partiesScope

To characterize a contract, the court must consider not only the obligations and other effects of the contract that the parties had stipulated, but also in some cases the circumstances of its formation and how they had applied it

In such respect, although the court would never be bound by the parties' own characterization, and although he or she had the power to attribute to the agreement the legal nature that, in his or her view, truly corresponded to its content, the court nevertheless remained bound by the common intention of the parties as regards the content of their agreement

Court had to consider whether the name given to a contract actually corresponded to the effects being sought, and it was up to [the Court] to impose on the parties the nature of their agreement that resulted from the expression of their intention.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Interpretation and characterization", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124962074

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Interpretation and characterization"

SCMR 2017
Decided on 28th July, 2017.

2017 S C M R 1734

UNIPRIX INC. — Appellant Versus GESTION GOSSELIN ET BERUBE INC. and another — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Canada
SCMR 2019
Decided on 2nd November, 2018.

2019 S C M R 454

CHURCHILL FALLS (LABRADOR) CORPORATION LIMITED — Appellant Versus HYDRO-QUEB C — Respondent

Court: Supreme Court of Canada*
PTD 2017
I.T.A. No.56/IB of 2014, decided on 12th May, 2015.

2017 P T D (Trib

NAUMAN MAHMOOD Versus COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (APPEALS-III), ISLAMABAD

Court: Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal
PTD 2019
Writ Petition No. 249168 of 2018, decided on 24th June, 2019.

2019 P T D 1862

ABDUL SALAM Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary and 3 others

Court: Lahore High Court
PTD 2026
I.T.Rs. Nos.152 to 155, 76 to 81 of 2016 and 42 of 2022, decided on 2nd December, 2025.

2026 P T D 269

WATEEN TELECOM LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE and 3 others

Court: Islamabad High Court
PLC(CS) 2006
Writ Petition No.14816 of 2004 decided on.25th January, 2006.

2006 P L C (C

Mst. SAJIDA PERVEEN Versus CITY DISTRICT GOVERNMENT through District Nazim and others

Court: Lahore High Court
SCMR 1977
Civil Appeal No. 293 of 1970, decided on 18th May 1976.

1977 S C M R 189

Ch. BAHAR MUHAMMAD‑Appellant Versus CHIEF SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER,

Court: ‑‑ Ss. 21 & 22‑Review‑Finality of order‑Chief Settlement Commissioner after spot inspection interpreting predecessor's order of transfer to include built up area as well as open space‑‑Matter coming in fresh round of litigation ors question of demarcation of portions respectively transferred in favour of parties and respondent himself moving Settlement Authority for demarcation‑Held; Absolutely wrong to characterize Chief Settlement Commissioner's order as one of review‑Order neither passed under S. 21 nor hit by provision of finality contained in S. 22.‑Review.
PTD 2003
Complaint No. 850‑L of 2002, decided on 5th November, 2002.

2003 P T D 865

Sh. SHAMAS ALI, MULTAN Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Court: Federal Tax Ombudsman
PTD 2012
I.T.As. Nos.357-358/IB, 404-406/IB, 731/IB of 2011, decided on 2nd July, 2011.

2012 P T D (Trib

Messrs KHAN CNG, FILLING STATION, RAWALPINDI and others Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (AUDIT-II), R.T.O., RAWALPINDI and others

Court: Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal of Pakistan
PLD 2021
N/A

P L D 2021 Lahore 271

SAMINA FAROOQ — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Schools Education Department, Lahore and 7 others — Respondents

Court: High Court