What is the result of an express term conflicting with an implied term?

When an express term within a contract directly conflicts with an implied term, the general principle in contract law is that the express term takes precedence. This is because express terms are specifically articulated and agreed upon by the parties involved, reflecting their intentions and expectations regarding the contract.

The rationale behind prioritizing express terms over implied terms is that the parties have explicitly stated their rights and obligations. This explicit articulation ensures clarity and reduces ambiguity in the contractual relationship. Implied terms, while still important, derive from legal principles, practices, or circumstances surrounding the contract rather than from the explicit intentions of the parties.

In legal contexts, if a court were to consider a dispute involving these conflicting terms, it would typically uphold the express term as it represents the specific agreement made by the parties, whereas the implied term serves only to fill gaps or enhance fairness based on customary practices or statutory requirements. This approach supports the enforcement of the intentions of the parties as clearly expressed in their agreement.