As a general rule, court decisions use clauses before the clause or clauses that contain court instructions. A court could, for example, declare that “while the applicant has filed an application for certain documents, the court has held a hearing on the application and has been the subject of extensive consultation in this matter, it is now ordered that the request for the requested documents be rejected.” It is the same when it comes to section titles or paragraphs. They could be used in interpreting the intentions of the parties when an agreement is reached, but they are certainly not binding. With respect to all kinds of agreements, I often say to clients: “Make a list of two things: (i) What did I give? and (ii) What did I get? And then you`ll find out where exactly in the agreement these things are supposed to be said. Nothing else really matters. Don`t fall into the trap of an “avocado fog” or be intimidated. Finally, in official proclamations, the solemnity of the occasion is often projected. The content. The information mentioned in the preamble should be limited to intentions, wishes or factual assertions. It is customary to limit these statements to substantive issues that may lead to a direct breach of the validity or applicability of the contract. Other features that explain the overall picture of the proposed concentration, such as the interdependence of the contract with other agreements (if any) or the need to comply with certain essential conditions or grant regulatory approvals, can also be discussed here. Overall, the views discussed in a preamble should be of such importance that, if one of them does not apply, the contract may be cancelled for legal reasons (hereafter the “error”). When you appear before a judge, that is the problem: (a) The “Whereas” clause almost always says what happened in another agreement or on an earlier date, and b) if there is no other document signed before or at the same time that creates the commitment mentioned, the commitment has never been made and nowhere.