Parol Evidence Rule Doctrin as the Limitation for the Parties in Submitting Evidence Before the Court

Praditha Suraja Wahana

Abstract views = 2011 times | downloads = 959 times


Contracts that made by the parties as the basis of engagement are the perfect and strongest proof or facts when there is a contract dispute between the parties which made it. To be reliable then the contents of the contract must be guaranteed the truth. The doctrine parol evidence rule plays a big role to make that happen. This doctrine works primarily in the evidentiary stage of the trial by preventing the submission of evidences which is classified as an extrinsic evidence to be submitted to the courts, since such evidences is highly questionable and therefore potentially fraudulent. However, the application of a rigid and absolute parol evidence rule may also lead to unfavorable situations for contracting parties, so under certain conditions such doctrine by the judge may be overruled. The doctrine if implemented in Indonesia will be support in enforcement and application the articles in BW (Indonesian Civil Code), especially Articles 1342 and Article 1350 BW. Moreover, the application of this doctrine can also improve judicial efficiency in terms of time, cost and personnel. The parties will be benefited from the application of this doctrine, for instance it will protect the truth of the contents of the contract so as to prevent doubts about the contracts they have made and encourage the parties to promote the prudentially principle.


Contract; Parol Evidence Rule; Extrinsic Evidence; The Evidentiary Stage.

Full Text:



Briyan A. Graner, ‘Unenforceable’, Black’s Law Dictionary (10th edn, Thomson Reuters 2009) LINK.

Charles T. Williams dan Wilmington, ‘Avoiding and Resolving Contract Conflicts Integration Clauses’ (ACC America, 2013).

John D. Donnell, Law For Business (Richard D Irwin Inc 1983).

Lawrence S. Clark dan Peter D. Kinder, Law and Bussiness (2rd edn, McGraw – Hill Inc 1988).

M. Yahya Harahap, Hukum Acara Perdata (9th edn, Sinar Grafika 2009).

Mark E. Rozkowski, Business Law: Principles, Cases and Policy (3rd edn, HarperCollins Publishers Inc 1992).

Nancy K. Kubasek, Dynamic Business Law (McGraw – Hill Irwin 2009).

Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum (Prenadamedia Group 2015).

Richard A. Mann dan Barry S. Roberts, ‘Essentials of Business Law and The Legal Environment’ (Legal Dictionary Thefreedictionary, 2008).

Richard Stone, Principles of Contract Law (4th ed, Cavendish, 2000).

Richard Wilmot dan Smith QC, Construction Contracts: Law and Practice (Oxford University Press 2010).

Ronald A Anderson, Business Law (12th edn, Western Publishing Co 1984).

Salim HS, Perancangan Kontrak & Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) (4th edn, Sinar Grafika 2008).

Subekti, Hukum Perjanjian (Intermasa 2005).

Arthur Corbin, ‘The Parol Evidence Rule’ (1944) 53 The Yale Law Journal LINK.

Liza Marina, ‘Budaya Hukum Kontrak Bisnis Internasional (Studi Komparatif Aspek Budaya Hukum Pelaku Kotrak Bisnis Antara Masyarakat Penganut Sistem Hukum Civil Law Dan Common Law)’ (2018) 1 Supremasi Hukum.

Tony Cole, ‘The Parol Evidence Rule: A Comparative Analysis And Proposal’ (2003) 26 UNSW Law Journal LINK.

Kirith P.Haria, ‘Contract Law : Parol Evidence Rule’ (Polity, 2013) LINK accessed 21 May 2017.

Law Teacher Essay, ‘Exceptions To The Parol Evidence Rule Contract Law’ (Lawteacher, 2014) LINK accessed 23 May 2017.

Trainor Fair Brook, ‘Integration Clause and The Parol Evidence Rule’ (Trainor Fair Brook, 2017) LINK accessed 26 May 2017.

Vinay Jain, ‘The Merger Clause of A Contract’ (Shake Law, 2014) LINK accessed 26 May 2017.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Yuridika

Yuridika (ISSN: 0215-840X | e-ISSN: 2528-3103) by under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Statcounter :

View My Stats

Yuridika has been indexed by:


Full Indexed Service