Best efforts: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|drafting|}}For pompouser types, “best endeavours” {{cite|Rhodia International Holdings Ltd |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 ones obligation.  
{{a|drafting|}}For pompouser types, “[[best endeavours]]” {{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.  


A “[[best endeavours]]” obligation requires the bus to go down every one of those avenues, and exhaust the lot of them. “All reasonable endeavours” on this scheme, is the same as “best endeavours”. It requires money down in the pursuit of real and active, reasonable, effort.
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.  
 
“[[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.


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*[[Best reasonable efforts]]
*[[Best reasonable efforts]]
*[[Worst reasonable efforts]]
*[[Worst reasonable efforts]]

Revision as of 11:08, 17 January 2023

The JC’s guide to writing nice.™
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.

For pompouser types, “best endeavoursRhodia 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, 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