Template:M summ IETA 5.3: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[No Encumbrances - IETA Provision|What]] a shower. There will seldom come a time where a nutshell version of a clause would come in more handy, readers. If only you subscribed to the premium version of the JC you would [[pjc:No Encumbrances - IETA Provision|have one]]. It is partly a case of shambolic conceptual organisation, partly ropey drafting, but this clause makes an omnishambles of a fairly straightforward concept. | |||
You might struggle to believe it from reading the clause but what happens is this: if {{ietaprov|DP}} delivers {{ietaprov|Allowances}} in fragrant disregard of the fact that some random has a claim on them, and {{ietaprov|RP}} finds out — presumably by means of an angry letter from said random — {{ietaprov|RP}} can send {{ietaprov|DP}} a notice, calculate its loss (which we suppose would be the market value of any {{ietaprov|Allowances}} it has to account to said angry, letter-writing random) and send an invoice. {{ietaprov|DP}} has three {{ietaprov|Banking Days}} to pay, with interest. Once paid, that’s it, everyone moves on. Though there is an odd caveat that this procedure is ''[[without prejudice]]'' to any defences DP might have, including ones based on limitation periods — which makes us think [[IETA]]’s {{cds}} had some morbid fear of calumnies buried deep in ancient history coming back to bite them. | You might struggle to believe it from reading the clause but what happens is this: if {{ietaprov|DP}} delivers {{ietaprov|Allowances}} in fragrant disregard of the fact that some random has a claim on them, and {{ietaprov|RP}} finds out — presumably by means of an angry letter from said random — {{ietaprov|RP}} can send {{ietaprov|DP}} a notice, calculate its loss (which we suppose would be the market value of any {{ietaprov|Allowances}} it has to account to said angry, letter-writing random) and send an invoice. {{ietaprov|DP}} has three {{ietaprov|Banking Days}} to pay, with interest. Once paid, that’s it, everyone moves on. Though there is an odd caveat that this procedure is ''[[without prejudice]]'' to any defences DP might have, including ones based on limitation periods — which makes us think [[IETA]]’s {{cds}} had some morbid fear of calumnies buried deep in ancient history coming back to bite them. | ||
Revision as of 13:47, 31 July 2023
What a shower. There will seldom come a time where a nutshell version of a clause would come in more handy, readers. If only you subscribed to the premium version of the JC you would have one. It is partly a case of shambolic conceptual organisation, partly ropey drafting, but this clause makes an omnishambles of a fairly straightforward concept.
You might struggle to believe it from reading the clause but what happens is this: if DP delivers Allowances in fragrant disregard of the fact that some random has a claim on them, and RP finds out — presumably by means of an angry letter from said random — RP can send DP a notice, calculate its loss (which we suppose would be the market value of any Allowances it has to account to said angry, letter-writing random) and send an invoice. DP has three Banking Days to pay, with interest. Once paid, that’s it, everyone moves on. Though there is an odd caveat that this procedure is without prejudice to any defences DP might have, including ones based on limitation periods — which makes us think IETA’s crack drafting squad™ had some morbid fear of calumnies buried deep in ancient history coming back to bite them.