A travel company and a tour guide entered into an agreement that stipulated that the guide would pay the company for booking 40 rooms in four installments. The company contended that the tour guide breached the agreement when he did not pay part of the installments, while the tour guide contended that he did not agree to a division of the installments into fixed dates.
The Court held that the tour guide is obligated to pay the company. The wording of the contract is the starting point for its interpretation, as long as it is clear and unambiguous. Thus, only to the extent that the wording of the contract is unclear may the contract be construed pursuant to the intent of the parties, as it is implied from the contract and the circumstances of its execution. Here, the wording of the agreement is clear and explicit, so that the company's interpretation according to which the guide undertook to pay for 40 rooms in four installments as agreed between the parties, is the correct construction of the contract. Thus, the tour guide breached the agreement and is obligated to pay the company.