Non-contractual obligation: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|negotiation|}}From the “shoot me now” file, the idea of a “[[non-contractual obligation]]” is relevant to: | {{a|negotiation|}}From the “shoot me now” file, the idea of a “[[non-contractual obligation]]” is relevant to: | ||
:(a) the [[terminally pedantic]] and | :(a) the [[terminally pedantic]] and | ||
(b) those splendid, if [[terminally pedantic]], folk whose handmaiden is the [[Rome II]] convention on [[governing law]]. | :(b) those splendid, if [[terminally pedantic]], folk whose handmaiden is the [[Rome II]] convention on [[governing law]]. | ||
“[[Non-contractual obligations]]” includes claims based on [[tort]] (such as [[negligence]]), breach of [[competition law]] and breach of [[statutory duty]] which may nonetheless arise out of a [[contract]] without amounting to a breach of it. As you can imagine, this happens a lot in the context of financial markets transactions.<ref>It doesn’t.</ref> | “[[Non-contractual obligations]]” includes claims based on [[tort]] (such as [[negligence]]), breach of [[competition law]] and breach of [[statutory duty]] which may nonetheless arise out of a [[contract]] without amounting to a breach of it. As you can imagine, this happens a lot in the context of financial markets transactions.<ref>It doesn’t.</ref> | ||
There is ''bound'' to be some [[Negotiator|well-meaning member of the bourgeoisie]] who will hold-up the conclusion of your deal because there is no mention of [[non-contractual obligation]]s in the [[governing law]] clause. You are best just to smile your kindest smile and, on the inside, wish a plague upon them and their houses, as you insert the language. Don’t even try adding in a sardonic “[[for the avoidance of doubt]]”, tempting though it may be — it may be justified, but they won’t like it and your best outcome is to be shot of this person and their ghastly document as quickly as you can. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
Revision as of 21:02, 19 November 2020
|
Negotiation Anatomy™
|
From the “shoot me now” file, the idea of a “non-contractual obligation” is relevant to:
- (a) the terminally pedantic and
- (b) those splendid, if terminally pedantic, folk whose handmaiden is the Rome II convention on governing law.
“Non-contractual obligations” includes claims based on tort (such as negligence), breach of competition law and breach of statutory duty which may nonetheless arise out of a contract without amounting to a breach of it. As you can imagine, this happens a lot in the context of financial markets transactions.[1]
There is bound to be some well-meaning member of the bourgeoisie who will hold-up the conclusion of your deal because there is no mention of non-contractual obligations in the governing law clause. You are best just to smile your kindest smile and, on the inside, wish a plague upon them and their houses, as you insert the language. Don’t even try adding in a sardonic “for the avoidance of doubt”, tempting though it may be — it may be justified, but they won’t like it and your best outcome is to be shot of this person and their ghastly document as quickly as you can.
See also
References
- ↑ It doesn’t.