For example https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/no-modification

No Modification. This Agreement may be changed only by a writing signed by both parties.

I know a contract is still binding without a signature, and even if it's not in writing. So are these types of terms enforceable?



Clauses requiring variations to be in writing are common and enforceable.

Of course, the parties can agree verbally to vary that clause - but if they agree it was varied, why are they in dispute?

|improve this answer|||||
  • I don't understand the conclusion made by your last point. If parties verbally agreed that verbal agreements were allowed, then a dispute arises about a future verbal agreement, hypothetically it would be easier for one party to argue that a verbal agreements were never valid anyway. – justasking111 Mar 19 '19 at 22:50
  • @justasking111 correct. If the parties make a verbal change and one party then welches (some people are unscrupulous, shocking, isn’t it?j then that party can rely on this clause to exclude the verbal agreement absent any other evidence of it. – Dale M Mar 20 '19 at 2:06

It varies by jurisdiction. In Colorado, such terms are completely invalid. Some jurisdictions honor them.

|improve this answer|||||
  • 1
    That is interesting I wouldn't have expected that.. Is that a matter of statute, or case law? – David Siegel Mar 19 '19 at 19:31
  • 1
    @DavidSiegel Long standing case law. – ohwilleke Mar 19 '19 at 22:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.