How should a market with a shared linguistic misunderstanding in a contract resolve?
Never closes

Imagine a hypothetical market about a contract between Volcanogate, a company buiding volcano-exploring vessels and their subcontractor:

In course of a civil lawsuit the text of the relevant agreement is produced and it includes the following text:
"¶731. All materials used in the construction of the vessel should be strictly inflammable."

Additionally a phone call recording between the Volcanogate CEO Alice and subcontractor representative Bob has been presented, transcript below:
"A: We should put something saying that the materials need to not catch fire, what was the word, flammable?

A: Nah, that's the opposite, I think?
B: Inflammable?

A: Yeah, inflammable, exactly.

B: I'll add it to the Google Doc.

A: Tubular"

It is thus cleear both sides indended meaning points to YES, however the language actually used doesn't. What is the correct resolution?

Get Ṁ1,000 play money