Commercial contract – Construction – Contractual indemnity – Implied terms. Court of Session: In an action in which the pursuer contended that a contractual indemnity entitled him to recover from the defender all costs and expenses he had incurred in relation to the recovery of deposits he had paid to it, not merely reasonable expenses, the court held that on an ordinary and natural reading of the indemnity its express terms were not capable of bearing the construction which the defender suggested, however a term should be implied that the costs and expenses indemnified were those which the pursuer might reasonably incur in relation to the recovery of the deposits; the implication of that term was necessary in order to give the contract business efficacy.