To the fullest extent permissible by law: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|plainenglish|[[File:Maximum extent permissible by law.png|400px|thumb|center|Unknown before 1978, this ghastly phrase has flourished in the intervening years. Source: Google]]}}
{{a|drafting|{{image|Maximum extent permissible by law|png}}Unknown before 1978, this ghastly phrase has flourished in the intervening years. Source: Google]]}}It won’t be long in the life of a young [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]] before {{sex|she}} comes across this delightfully {{f|flannel}}led [[subordinate clause]]:  
It won’t be long in the life of a young [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]] before {{sex|she}} comes across this delightfully {{f|flannel}}led [[subordinate clause]]:  


''[[To the maximum extent permissible by law]],...''
{{quote|
''none of the Issuer, Arranger or Programme Counterparties, [[to the maximum extent permissible by law]], accepts any liability for the contents of this prospectus...''}}


{{sex|She}} might pause briefly, on that first fumbling encounter, and wonder what legal mischief this [[incantation]] is [[calculated]] to ward off. Does the law assume that any contractual provision is [[deemed]], unless you say to the contrary, to be half-hearted in its intent — a choked nine-iron back onto the fairway from behind a tree, and not a full-throated drive at the green?  
{{sex|She}} might pause briefly, on that first fumbling encounter, and wonder what legal mischief this [[incantation]] is [[calculated]] to ward off. Does the law assume that any contractual provision is [[deemed]], unless you say to the contrary, to be half-hearted in its intent — a choked nine-iron back onto the fairway from behind a tree, and not a full-throated drive at the green?  


God only knows, is this commentator’s remark. But a bit of research suggests that this gem found its way into the forensic world some time in the late 1970s. And as you'll see to the right<ref>Original file [https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=maximum+extent+permissible+by+law&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cmaximum%20extent%20permissible%20by%20law%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cmaximum%20extent%20permissible%20by%20law%3B%2Cc1 here]</ref>, it has flourished since its introduction.
God only knows, is this commentator’s remark. God probably doesn’t know either. But a bit of research suggests that this gem found its way into the forensic world some time in the late 1970s. And as you’ll see to the right<ref>Original file [https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=maximum+extent+permissible+by+law&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cmaximum%20extent%20permissible%20by%20law%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cmaximum%20extent%20permissible%20by%20law%3B%2Cc1 here]</ref>, it has flourished since its introduction.


The lilly-liveredness of this statement makes you shudder.
{{egg}}
{{egg}}
{{ref}}
{{ref}}

Revision as of 14:51, 15 November 2022

The JC’s guide to writing nice.™
{{{3}}}
Unknown before 1978, this ghastly phrase has flourished in the intervening years. Source: Google]]
Index: Click to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

It won’t be long in the life of a young lawyer before she comes across this delightfully flannelled subordinate clause:

none of the Issuer, Arranger or Programme Counterparties, to the maximum extent permissible by law, accepts any liability for the contents of this prospectus...

She might pause briefly, on that first fumbling encounter, and wonder what legal mischief this incantation is calculated to ward off. Does the law assume that any contractual provision is deemed, unless you say to the contrary, to be half-hearted in its intent — a choked nine-iron back onto the fairway from behind a tree, and not a full-throated drive at the green?

God only knows, is this commentator’s remark. God probably doesn’t know either. But a bit of research suggests that this gem found its way into the forensic world some time in the late 1970s. And as you’ll see to the right[1], it has flourished since its introduction.

The lilly-liveredness of this statement makes you shudder.

References

  1. Original file here