Assuming there is a class of contracting parties which are allowed unilateral changes to contracts (e.g. landlords, banks, etc.) by law. Does that imply that such a law must be interpreted under "strict construction" or "narrow interpretation"?
It seems like it should be so that the other parties' rights (to negotiate their contract obligations and considerations) are diminished in the least ways possible.
But is that a general legal principle? Is it protected by law or precedent? Or does it depend on each individual jurisdiction?