82,891
edits
Contractual negligence: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
What should one make of this? At a glance it seems perfectly reasonable. To be sure, it is time-honoured boilerplate, thrown into contracts to close them out like chump change tossed into the bill platter at the end of an agreeable meal with passable company of whom one has now had enough. | What should one make of this? At a glance it seems perfectly reasonable. To be sure, it is time-honoured boilerplate, thrown into contracts to close them out like chump change tossed into the bill platter at the end of an agreeable meal with passable company of whom one has now had enough. | ||
But does it make sense to fritter away a contractual claim this way? | But does it make sense to fritter away a contractual claim this way? In this author's opinion no, except in one special case: a party's ability to claim under an {{tag|indemnity}}. | ||
==={{tag|Fraud}}=== | ==={{tag|Fraud}}=== | ||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
''But explicitly referencing a tortious standard in your contract hardly helps with that exercise''. | ''But explicitly referencing a tortious standard in your contract hardly helps with that exercise''. | ||
===The exception that proves every rule: {{tag|Indemnities}}==== | |||
{{Liability carveouts for indemnities}} | |||
===See also=== | ===See also=== | ||