Criteria of interpretation in the absence of qualifications in contractual modifications within the framework of the means of control of contractual disputes

Abstract

By means of this research work, which we have called “Criteria interpretation in the absence of exceptions in contractual modifications within the framework of the means of control of contractual disputes” find how the contracting statute (Law 80 of 1993) is not the only normative source for the Judge to interpret the true intention of the parties during the execution of the contract. They sign amending agreements in the event of exceptional situations that could lead to the paralysis or serious impact on the normal execution of the contract, which in the future would have an impact on the continuity of the provision of the contracted public service. In accordance with the above, we will show that the parties, before signing the amending contracts during the contractual stage, expressly omit to state their reservations or claims, which within the framework of the means of control of contractual disputes, they intend to assert through their claims, an important issue that gave rise to divergences of interpretation between Subsections A, B and C of the Third Section of the Council of State, where, depending on the case, the proceedings initiated by the parties did not prosper, due to the failure to record their observations in writing, which is why the need arose for the High Administrative Court to unify a judgment by which the interpretative criteria to which the natural judge of the contract must resort in the absence of Exceptions in contractual modifications.