Posted December 10, 201311 yr comment_19926 What are your thoughts on the use of the word "but not limited to” when used in a contract. Lately, I’ve seen some Performance Work Statement (PWS) that use this wording. In my opinion this carries a strong connotation that leaves the door open for any other possibilities, and can be vague.
December 10, 201311 yr comment_19927 I think the wording can be good in some cases -- and it can be bad in some cases. This is sort of a vague answer, isn't it? :-)
December 11, 201311 yr comment_19930 ipod, do you have specific concerns with any of the PWS's that you have seen? I read the article to indicate that, the phrase may be interpreted to mean something to the effect of 'and the like' or 'or similar', in order not to restrict the meaning of listed items to their literal, exact usage.
December 11, 201311 yr comment_19931 It is generally a bad idea to word it that way. It sets the stage for disagreement between the parties as to what all is included. When unreasonable people on either side are involved in the interpretation, it can become a problem. When possible compete the list.
December 11, 201311 yr comment_19932 I agree that one should complete a list when possible. I don't agree that it is "generally a bad idea" to use the term "including, but not limited to..." It depends upon the context in which it is used. I could say the same thing about literal interpretations of specifically listed items: "When unreasonable people on either side are involved in the interpretation, it can become a problem." One can follow some of the Google Search results for [asbca "including but not limited to"] to see where it has been used in those situations.
