The parol evidence rule is circular and says no more than that oral statements are inadmissible when a contract is wholly recorded in writting,but admissible when the contract is part written?

The parol evidence rule is a legal principle that prohibits the introduction of extrinsic evidence (such as oral statements or prior agreements) to contradict, vary, or add to the terms of a written contract that is intended to be a complete and final expression of the parties' agreement.

In other words, if a contract is fully written and intended to be the complete and final agreement between the parties, any oral statements made before or during the formation of the contract are generally not admissible to alter or add to the terms of the written contract. However, if the contract is only partially written or if there are gaps or ambiguities in the written contract, then extrinsic evidence such as oral statements may be admissible to clarify or interpret the terms of the contract.

The rule is often criticized for being circular because it essentially states that oral statements are inadmissible when a contract is fully written, but admissible when the contract is only partially written. Critics argue that this creates a loophole that allows parties to manipulate the rule by intentionally leaving gaps or ambiguities in the written contract in order to introduce extrinsic evidence to support their interpretation of the contract.

Overall, the parol evidence rule is intended to promote certainty and finality in contractual agreements by ensuring that the terms of a written contract are clear and enforceable. However, its application can be complex and controversial, particularly in cases where the written contract is not a complete expression of the parties' agreement.

The parol evidence rule is not circular. It states that when a contract is fully integrated in writing, extrinsic evidence of prior or contemporaneous oral agreements is inadmissible to vary or contradict the terms of the written contract. The rule is based on the assumption that the written contract is the complete and final expression of the parties' agreement and that any prior or contemporaneous oral agreements are merged into the written contract.

The parol evidence rule does not apply when the contract is only partially written. In such cases, extrinsic evidence of prior or contemporaneous oral agreements is admissible to supplement the written contract. This is because the written contract is not the complete and final expression of the parties' agreement and the oral agreements are not merged into the written contract.