Standard form contracts can be classified into two categories; negotiated contracts and contracts of adhesion. Negotiated contracts or industry contracts1 are prepared and revised jointly by a group that should reflect the interests of both the contracting parties. Contracts of adhesion, on the other hand, are drawn up to represent solely the interests of one party and put forward to the other on “take-it-or-leave-it” terms.2 In that sense, contracts of adhesion can also be referred to as unilateral contracts and are partisan documents which originate from and/or totally represent the interests of one party. Accordingly, the courts applied the contra proferentem rule of construction to such one-sided contracts. By this rule, judges interpreted ambiguously worded clauses “against the proferens ”, i.e. against the persons who drafted or tendered the document.3 What is unclear about the application of the rule is, who qualifies to be considered a proferens within the rule. Would the proferens have to (i) have sole control of the drafting or (ii) be the party in whose favour the contract had been drawn up, i.e. a contract of adhesion drafted by the proferens , or could the rule also apply (iii) to a party who uses or tenders a negotiated form of contract, or even for that matter, (iv) a party who relies on a clause in either a contract of adhesion drafted against him or a negotiated contract tendered by the other party.