Best efforts: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|drafting|}} | {{a|drafting|}}{{d|{{PAGENAME}}|/bɛst ˈɛfəts/|n}} | ||
By contrast a “[[best endeavours]]” obligation requires the [[Clapham omnibus|fabled bus passenger]] to alight and go down ''every one'' of the avenues that seems reasonable, before stuffing that for a game of soldiers, to exhaust the lot of them. | For pompouser types, “[[best endeavours]]” — “efforts” and “endeavours” being interchangeable — {{cite|Rhodia International Holdings Ltd |Huntsmann International|2007|EWHC 292 (Comm)|}} held that “''reasonable'' endeavours” requires [[Clapham omnibus|the person on the Clapham omnibus]] only “endeavour” down a ''single'' avenue of reasonableness. That having resulted in a dead-end, there is no further cause to wander up and down thoroughfares, however reasonable they may in the abstract be, to discharge one’s obligation. | ||
By contrast, a “[[best endeavours]]” obligation requires the [[Clapham omnibus|fabled bus passenger]] to alight and go down ''every one'' of the avenues that seems reasonable,<ref>Reasonable to whom? To a person on the [[Clapham omnibus]], of course.</ref> before stuffing that for a game of soldiers, to exhaust the lot of them. | |||
“[[All reasonable endeavours]]” on this logic, is the same as “best endeavours”. It requires money down in the pursuit of real and active, reasonable, effort. | “[[All reasonable endeavours]]” on this logic, is the same as “best endeavours”. It requires money down in the pursuit of real and active, reasonable, effort. | ||
| Line 8: | Line 10: | ||
*[[Best reasonable efforts]] | *[[Best reasonable efforts]] | ||
*[[Worst reasonable efforts]] | *[[Worst reasonable efforts]] | ||
{{Ref}} | |||
Latest revision as of 11:13, 17 January 2023
|
The JC’s guide to writing nice.™
|
Best efforts
/bɛst ˈɛfəts/ (n.)
For pompouser types, “best endeavours” — “efforts” and “endeavours” being interchangeable — Rhodia International Holdings Ltd v Huntsmann International [2007] EWHC 292 (Comm) held that “reasonable endeavours” requires the person on the Clapham omnibus only “endeavour” down a single avenue of reasonableness. That having resulted in a dead-end, there is no further cause to wander up and down thoroughfares, however reasonable they may in the abstract be, to discharge one’s obligation.
By contrast, a “best endeavours” obligation requires the fabled bus passenger to alight and go down every one of the avenues that seems reasonable,[1] before stuffing that for a game of soldiers, to exhaust the lot of them.
“All reasonable endeavours” on this logic, is the same as “best endeavours”. It requires money down in the pursuit of real and active, reasonable, effort.
See also
References
- ↑ Reasonable to whom? To a person on the Clapham omnibus, of course.