82,893
edits
Conclusive evidence clause: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
[[Conclusive evidence]] clauses are meant to support — [[dramatic look gopher]] — ''[[indemnities]]''. There’s a wealth of snarkily-presented information in [[indemnities]] [[Indemnity|in the usual place]]<ref>Go on — honestly — you’ll love it: {{t|Indemnity}}</ref> but the key point to remember is that, a ''[[well-crafted indemnity|well-crafted]]'' {{tag|indemnity}}<ref>Much talked about, seldom seen.</ref> is meant to be a pre-agreement to pay an ''ascertainable sum'' of money: both parties are meant to have a fairly clear handle on what will have to be paid out. | [[Conclusive evidence]] clauses are meant to support — [[dramatic look gopher]] — ''[[indemnities]]''. There’s a wealth of snarkily-presented information in [[indemnities]] [[Indemnity|in the usual place]]<ref>Go on — honestly — you’ll love it: {{t|Indemnity}}</ref> but the key point to remember is that, a ''[[well-crafted indemnity|well-crafted]]'' {{tag|indemnity}}<ref>Much talked about, seldom seen.</ref> is meant to be a pre-agreement to pay an ''ascertainable sum'' of money: both parties are meant to have a fairly clear handle on what will have to be paid out. | ||
Of course, as we well know, most [[indemnities]] are ''not'' well-crafted, but will be hopelessly vague, woolly, all-you-can-possibly-think-of affairs — just the kind of thing that ''isn’t'' “readily ascertainable”, at least not without the need for the a full adversarial process, with a day’s cross examination from Sir Jerrold | Of course, as we well know, most [[indemnities]] are ''not'' well-crafted, but will be hopelessly vague, woolly, all-you-can-possibly-think-of affairs — just the kind of thing that ''isn’t'' “readily ascertainable”, at least not without the need for the a full adversarial process, with a day’s cross examination from Sir Jerrold Baxter-Morley, Q.C., to thrash them out. | ||
Thus, you will see that tell-tale [[caveat]]: “in the absence of [[manifest error]]”: where the sum claimed was obvious and not really in dispute; the bank did certify it but a fly got in the typewriter or some such thing and they sent out a certificate containing obviously the wrong number. Well, clearly that’s not conclusive, right? | Thus, you will see that tell-tale [[caveat]]: “in the absence of [[manifest error]]”: where the sum claimed was obvious and not really in dispute; the bank did certify it but a fly got in the typewriter or some such thing and they sent out a certificate containing obviously the wrong number. Well, clearly that’s not conclusive, right? | ||