Headings: Difference between revisions

Headings (view source)

Revision as of 11:03, 16 August 2021

739 bytes added , 16 August 2021

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,927

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{a|contract|{{subtable|'''Sample''':<br>“Headings are for ease of reference only and shall be ignored in construing this Agreement”}}}}What is it that the [[legal eagle]] so distrusts about headings?
-If you are anything like the [[JC]], the [[headings]] are the only part of the contract you ''do'', with any regularity, read. They orient; they provide a superstructure; they provide ''context'' in a world so crushingly bereft of it. So why exclude them from your semantic consideration? We are at a loss. At best to do so provides a cover to pernicious arguments a miscreant might raise at a later stage to justify enforcing, or resisting, a contractual provision the ''context'' indicated was meant for another purpose altogether.
+If you are anything like the [[JC]], the [[headings]] are the only part of the contract you ''do'', with any regularity, read. They orient; they provide a superstructure; they provide ''context'' in a world so crushingly bereft of it. So why exclude them from your semantic consideration? We are at a loss. At best, to do so provides cover to pernicious arguments a miscreant might raise at a later stage to justify enforcing, or resisting, a contractual provision the ''context'' indicated was meant for another purpose altogether.
+Why would you put words in a legal contract if you wanted them to be ignored? Is that not the definition of [[waste]]? Look, if you don’t want headings to count, don’t ''use'' the damn things, and expect your document to be the kind of grey, unpunctuated [[entropic]] sludge of Times New Roman that emanates from every [[U.S. law firm|US law firm]]. Is that really what you want?<ref>U/S. attorneys: this is a rhetorical question.</ref>
+If, perversely, you ''care'' about your reader’s easy comprehension, use headings to structure your argument<ref>A legal contract is, after fashion, an “argument”.</ref> but do not then complain if your readers expect your argument to, actually, follow the framework you have set out.
 {{sa}}
 *{{isdaprov|Headings}} in the ISDA
-*[[Inrterpretation]] and [[construction]]
+*[[Interpretation]] and [[construction]]
+{{ref}}