All rules

A defined term used in another form

defined-term-formon by default (info)Japanese / English

A defined term later written in another form: quoted, lower case, or lengthened

Example

How to fix

Use the defined term without quotes and, in English, with its capital as defined. If the ordinary sense is meant, use another word.

Why it matters

A contract uses each defined term exactly as defined. Quoting a term again after its definition ("the "Services"") leaves the reader asking whether it is being defined anew. Writing "services" where "Services" is defined splits the defined sense from the ordinary one, which is where disputes start. In Japanese, 本件業務 written where 本業務 is defined reads as another task. "the Application" written where the Pinecone Notes application is defined as the "App" leaves the reader asking whether it is the same thing. chaff points at a term set in quotes again after its definition, at a capitalised term written in lower case (when the capitalised uses are more, "records officer" for "Records Officer" too), at a Japanese term written with its other prefix (本 for 本件 or the other way round) unless that form is defined too, and at a term made longer with a word of its own definition (Application for App, 文書管理責任者 for 管理責任者). Statutes and regulations use their defined terms as defined, too.

What it does not flag

The definitions themselves ("Services" means, (the "Services")), uses before the definition (use-before-definition reads those), capitals at the start of a sentence, and terms written in lower case more than {limit} times or more often than capitalised (taken as the ordinary word used on purpose) are not reported, nor is a use inside the defining sentence ("Customer" means the party named "Customer"). A statute or a regulation (a document read with the statute profile) quotes a term to talk about the term itself ("controller" has the same meaning as in Part 3), so a quoted term is not reported there. A lower-case phrase that starts with an adjective, or that an adjective, a possessive or a noun comes before (its own confidential information, additional terms of service, a common parent, a limited liability company), one followed by "of" and a bare noun (certificates of deposit), and one inside another defined term (certificate of merger where Certificate of Merger is defined) is the ordinary phrase and is not reported; after a pointing word (the other party, such company) it is. Nor is a quoted term that the words before it name as a term (the definition of "Material Adverse Effect", the term "Affiliate"). Nor is a quoted Japanese term that quotes the wording of a provision or a document (憲法一九条にいう「良心の自由」, 「謝罪」の文言). A term with its other prefix (本件業務 for 本業務) is not reported when that form is defined too, or inside a longer word (見本物品). A longer word is not reported when only a pointing word comes before the term (当該管理責任者), when the term has two characters or fewer (提供, 登録), when the definition itself writes the longer word (東京都（以下「都」という。）), when the longer word is defined too, or when it is a plural (Boxes).

Turning it off or relaxing it

This page is built from the rule's definition file:packages/chaff/rules/defined-term-form.yaml