The paper addresses the problem of the determination of the intended meaning in linguistic controversies which may arise from ambiguous clauses of contracts. I propose a view in which the process of determination of the intended meaning depends on a negotiation of situational extra-semantic interests of agents involved in the controversy which the clause refers to. Agents involved in a linguistic controversy negotiate their extra-semantic interests and reach an agreement on their respective situational interests. Consequently, they fix the intended meaning a meaning compatible with the reached agreement. The thesis is that the situational extra-semantic interests of agents drive determination of the intended meaning in meaning negotiation. In particular, I report two controversies which arose from two contracts of employment. In the first, I focus on the process of selection of a plausible interpretation for a single agent. In the second, I focus on the determination of the intended meaning on the basis of interests negotiation between agents.