If judges are no better than average at assessing the truthfulness of witnesses, what are the implications for the interpretation of contracts in

  1. If judges are no better than average at assessing the truthfulness of witnesses, what are the implications for the interpretation of contracts in which the parties’ testimony conflicts and there is no independence evidence?
  2. How do you think judges, who, like all of us, have their own inherent (perhaps unconscious) biases can better assess testimony in the diverse society like Canada?
  3. What steps might a business person take to reduce the likelihood of problem in interpreting contracts?