Carve-out: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
509 bytes added ,  11 September 2019
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The exception which, in the eyes of a [[Mediocre lawyer|diligent clerk]], proves the rule. No rule is too complicated that it can't me made more so by the judicious use of a [[carve-out]]. Carve-outs often go with out saying, and can be seen as a species of [[without limitation]] or [[for the avoidance of doubt]].
{{g}}The exception which, in the eyes of a [[Mediocre lawyer|diligent clerk]], proves the rule. No rule, no legal proposition, is too complicated that it can't me made more so by the judicious use of a [[carve-out]]. Carve-outs may go with out saying, and can be seen as a species of [[without limitation]] or [[for the avoidance of doubt]], but many ore woven froma stouter fibre, whose implied articulation no drafting, however doubtless, could presume.
 
The classic [[carve out]] — from a liability exclusion which is itself a kind of carve-out, meaning this is some kind of carve ''back in''; a kind of elaborate sculpting of the rock from which we extract our legal relations — is in the case of one’s [[negligence, fraud or wilful default]].
 
{{sa}}
*[[Negligence, fraud or wilful default]]
*[[Gross negligence]]

Navigation menu