Template:Indemnity description: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:
Few things are more apt to excite an attorney's animal spirits than an [[indemnity]]. Why so, you might ask, for it is nothing more than a promise to pay a defined sum should pre-agreed circumstances arise?
Few things are more apt to excite an attorney's animal spirits than an [[indemnity]]. Why so, you might ask, for it is nothing more than a promise to pay a defined sum should pre-agreed circumstances arise?


Indeed so, if used as the Lord* intended. An indemnity is a sensible way — perhaps the only way — to allocate the risks of externalities two merchants might encounter in agreeing to provide one another goods and services.  
Indeed so, if used as the Lord* intended. An indemnity is a sensible way — perhaps the only way — to allocate the risks of externalities two merchants might encounter when providing one another goods and services.  


{{box|An indemnity is nothing more than a contractual promise to pay a defined sum should a pre-agreed circumstance arise.}}
{{box|An indemnity is nothing more than a contractual promise to pay a defined sum should a pre-agreed circumstance arise.}}
Line 9: Line 9:


====What an indemnity is not====
====What an indemnity is not====
An {{tag|indemnity}} is no ''better'' than a contractual claim. It ''is'' a contractual claim. It does not have a harsher accounting or [[regulatory capital|capital]] impact. You enforce it as you would a breach of contract: by suing the indemnifying person for its failure to pay the indemnified amount. Since (if you've crafted it correctly) it is a claim to pay a pre-defined (or at any rate [[deterministic]]) sum, the elements you need to prove your claim are easily produced: a well-crafted indemnity is therefore apt for [[summary judgment]].
An {{tag|indemnity}} is no ''better'' than a contractual claim. It ''is'' a contractual claim. It does not have a harsher accounting or [[regulatory capital|capital]] impact. You enforce it as you would a breach of contract: by suing the [[indemnifier]] for its failure to pay the indemnified amount. Since (if well crafted) it is a claim to pay a pre-defined (or at any rate [[deterministic]]) sum, proving your claim is not hard and a well-crafted indemnity is apt for [[summary judgment]].


Note a point of profound importance. While the failure to honour an indemnity is a breach of contract; the occurrence of circumstances permitting a claim under one is not.
Note a point of profound importance. While the failure to honour an indemnity is a breach of contract; the occurrence of circumstances permitting a claim under one is not.


To claim under a (well-crafted) indemnity, therefore, there is no breach to allege; no loss to prove; no causation required, no value judgment needed to satisfy the [[indemnifier]] of your bona fides: all you need prove is:  
To claim under a (well-crafted) indemnity, therefore, one need allege no breach and prove no loss. No causation is required, no value judgment needed to satisfy the [[indemnifier]] of your bona fides: all you need prove is:  
*There is an [[indemnity]]
*There is an [[indemnity]]
*The indemnified event has happened;
*The [[indemnified event]] has happened;
*You have calculated the indemnified sum.
*You have calculated the [[indemnified sum]].


Recovering for a failure to honour a (well-crafted) indemnity is also straightforward: You must prove only the above, and the following:
Recovering for a failure to honour a (well-crafted) indemnity is also straightforward: You must attest to the above, and the following:
*You have demanded the indemnified sum from [[indemnifier]]; and  
*You have demanded the [[indemnified sum]] from [[indemnifier]]; and  
*The [[indemnifier]] has not paid it.
*The [[indemnifier]] has not paid it.


Nor is an {{tag|indemnity}} (if properly crafted), broader or of less determinate scope than any other contractual claim, though, thanks to the continental drift, some indemnities try to catch everything under the sun. They shouldn't. Indemnities are precision tools for narrow risks, not weapons of mass destruction. The sky should not fall in under the weight of a well-proportioned {{tag|indemnity}}.
Nor is a (well-crafted) {{tag|indemnity}} broader or of less determinate scope than any other contractual claim. It might be "taxes incurred in performing our services to you": an unavoidable expense that would not arise but for the contract, that has not been priced in, and which has a predictable financial consequence. Indemnities are precision tools for narrow risks, not weapons of mass destruction. The sky should not fall in under the weight of a well-proportioned {{tag|indemnity}}.
 
This is where things have gone awry. Many latter-day indemnities are not articulated this way. It is common for indemnities to catch every contingency under the sun. They shouldn't.  


====How is an indemnity different from a breach of contract?====
====How is an indemnity different from a breach of contract?====