From Law wiki, the wiki for law research

This case (Nicolene v Simmonds [1953] 1 QB 543) demonstrates how a court may choose to allow a Contract to stand, even if parts of it are meaningless, if the alternative would be to set a precedent that is contrary to public policy. Here a contract contained the words subject to the usual conditions of acceptance. The parties had not done business before, so it was impossible to tell what the usual conditions were. However, the court ruled that this phrase should simply be ignored, and the rest of the contract left to stand. Otherwise, it was argued, anyone who wanted to renege on a contract could have it voided on a technicality.