Short answer. When a word in your contract can be read in more than one way, Article 1375 settles it: the meaning that best fits the nature and object of the contract controls. The court does not read the word in isolation — it chooses the sense that serves what the parties set out to achieve.

What the law says

Words which may have different significations shall be understood in that which is most in keeping with the nature and object of the contract.

Civil Code, Article 1375 — Words With Several Meanings. Read the full provision →

Ambiguous words are read in context, not in isolation

Contracts are written by people, not machines, and words often carry more than one possible meaning. Rather than let a case turn on a dictionary definition picked at random, the Civil Code tells courts how to choose. Article 1375 provides that words which may have different significations shall be understood in that which is most in keeping with the nature and object of the contract. The controlling question is not what a word can mean in the abstract, but what it must mean given the kind of agreement the parties made and the purpose they were pursuing when they made it.

The object of the contract is the guide

To apply the rule you first ask what the contract was for — its subject matter and the practical goal the parties had in mind. A term is then given the reading that advances that goal and fits the transaction as a whole. A word used in a contract of sale is understood in the way that makes sense for a sale; the same word in a lease may take a different shade because the object differs. Meaning follows function: the interpretation that keeps the contract coherent and workable is preferred over one that would defeat its purpose.

Why this protects the real bargain

This principle protects the deal the parties actually struck from being derailed by a stray ambiguous word. It works together with the Civil Code's other interpretation rules, which look at the parties' evident intention and read all the stipulations together rather than one clause alone. For anyone drafting or disputing a contract, the lesson is practical: define key terms clearly, and where a dispute arises, argue from the contract's evident purpose, because that purpose is exactly what the law uses to resolve a word capable of two meanings. And if genuine doubt survives after weighing the contract's object, other interpretation rules take over — for example, an obscure stipulation is read against the party who caused the obscurity, so a drafter cannot benefit from ambiguity of their own making.

Cases citing this provision

These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.