Template:M summ EUA Annex Settlement Disruption: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Settlement Disruption - Emissions Annex Provision|Oft]] mentioned in a similar breath to a {{euaprov|Suspension Event}} and a {{euaprov|Failure to Deliver}}, a Settlement Disruption Event is one of the external events which leads to a suspension of obligations, pending the lifting of the disruption, that are set out in the {{euaprov|Settlement Disruption}} provisions of Paragraph {{euaprov|(d)(i)(4)}} of the {{emissionsannex}}.
{{euaprov|Settlement Disruption}} and {{euaprov|Suspension}} beg for comparison, so [[Settlement Disruption and Suspension - Emissions Annex Provision|here]] is one: {{compare|65842|65840}} them. See also our laborious, but probably wasted effort, of a table parsing when, and when not, to apply them:
===For the avoidance of doubt, this is intended to avoid doubt===
{{imageflex|name=Disruption Venn|extension=png|47|frame=frameless|align=center|caption=|size=47}}
There is a wonderful [[nested uncertainty avoidance device]] buried in the redundant second paragraph, which effectively says, [[for the avoidance of doubt]], this [[For the avoidance of doubt|avoidance of doubt]] paragraph is intended to avoid doubt, and not actually change anything. Here [[Ourobos]] reaches around and eats its own tail: a clause which appears to do something — for why else in a competently-composed passage would it be there? — appears to be there simply to deny its own ''raison d’etre''.
===Traumnovelle===
 
{{Emissions force majeure termination summ|euaprov}}
The odd thing is, however that the passage does not ''avoid'' doubt so much as create it, for what ''is''
:“... the low or non-allocation of {{euaprov|Allowances}} by a {{euaprov|Member State}} or ... the delay or failure of a Member State or Central Administrator to replace Allowances of the {{euaprov|Third Compliance Period}} with {{euaprov|Allowances}} for the {{euaprov|Fourth Compliance Period}}...”
if not “an event or circumstance beyond the control of the party affected that cannot, after the use of [[all reasonable efforts]], be overcome and which makes it impossible for that party to perform its obligations”?
 
Why should that not be a {{euaprov|Settlement Disruption}}?
===Settlement Disruption and Suspension===
{{Suspension v Settlement Disruption}}
 
{{M summ EUA Annex (d)(i)(4)(D)}}

Latest revision as of 14:22, 21 November 2023

Settlement Disruption and Suspension beg for comparison, so here is one: compare them. See also our laborious, but probably wasted effort, of a table parsing when, and when not, to apply them:

47%
47%

Traumnovelle

It is interesting to compare, across all three of the emissions trading documentation suites, the differences and similarities when it comes to resolving an unquenchable Settlement Disruption Event.