Absent a written agreement between the parties that expressly imposes affirmative obligations to the contrary for that transaction: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:
A moment’s reflection can break down this turgid twaddle:
A moment’s reflection can break down this turgid twaddle:
:“Absent” => “''unless''”
:“Absent” => “''unless''”
:“a written agreement between the parties” => “''the parties agree''”
:“a written agreement between the parties” => “''we agree''”
:“that expressly imposes affirmative obligations to the contrary”  => “''to the contrary''”
:“that expressly imposes affirmative obligations to the contrary”  => “''otherwise''”
:“for that transaction” => “”
:“for that transaction” => “”


Revision as of 16:12, 17 June 2019

Towards more picturesque speech™


Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

This lumpen phrase has found its way into the derivatives canon. Google “absent a written agreement between the parties that expressly imposes affirmative obligations to the contrary for that transaction”, in quotes [1], if you don't believe me. There are 2000 hits for this exact phrase. By contrast "Last night, I shot an elephant in my pyjamas. How he got in my pyjamas, I'll never know"[2] garners only 4,000 hits.

HOW CAN THIS PHRASE BE HALF AS POPULAR AS ONE OF GROUCHO MARX'S GREATEST LINES?

A moment’s reflection can break down this turgid twaddle:

“Absent” => “unless”
“a written agreement between the parties” => “we agree”
“that expressly imposes affirmative obligations to the contrary” => “otherwise”
“for that transaction” => “”

This is, in other words, a long-winded way of saying “unless we agree otherwise”.

Not wishing to get all legal-techie on you, but a legal contract is an agreement. Nothing but an agreement. It is axiomatic that the parties to it may change their minds. If they agree to do something different, that is that. If contractual counterparties “agree otherwise”, then otherwise it must be. One need not say this.

If it is meaningless to say “unless agreed otherwise”, then how fantastical must it be to say, “absent a written agreement between the parties that expressly imposes affirmative obligations to the contrary for that transaction”?

References

  1. ↑ Let me Google that for you: you’ll need to supply your own quotation marks.
  2. ↑ Let me Google that for you: you’ll need to supply your own quotation marks.
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Absent_a_written_agreement_between_the_parties_that_expressly_imposes_affirmative_obligations_to_the_contrary_for_that_transaction&oldid=30924"