I've noticed a typo on an investment company's disclaimer in a brochure, to the effect:

This company and its research affiliate June continue to have such dealings and June also have other ongoing business dealings with other firms whose products are included herein.

Clearly some one replaced all instances of "may" and replaced with "June."


In the event that anything relating to this disclaimer does make its way all the way to court, what would the implications be? Would this be insufficient to cover the legal liability it was originally written to, given that it's now effectively garbled and ambiguous?

  • Do you think that "I didn't understand this garbled and ambiguous mess, so I decided to agree to it and sign it anyway" is a strong position in court?
    – nvoigt
    Aug 11 at 10:21

1 Answer 1


Garbled and ambiguous?

I guess it took you all of 20 seconds to work out what it meant. Why do think a court can’t do that too?

Documents contain typos, that doesn’t necessarily make them ambiguous.

The automatic correction of typos is known as the Scrivener’s doctrine - a scrivener being an almost archaic term for a clerk, scribe, or notary, because documents were written for many centuries before the invention of the typewriter.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .