82,976
edits
If and to the extent that: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{a|plainenglish|}}{{dpn||conj|}}A laboured legalism that means no more than “to the extent that” or “as far as”, the reason being “that to no extent at all” is another way of saying “if not”. {{sa}} *If") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|plainenglish|}}{{dpn||conj|}}A laboured legalism that means no more than “[[to the extent that]]” or “[[as far as]]”, the reason being “that to no extent at all” is another way of saying “if not”. | {{a|plainenglish|}}{{dpn||conj|}}A laboured legalism that means no more than “[[to the extent that]]” or “[[as far as]]”, the reason being “that to no extent at all” is another way of saying “if not”. There are, as we know, to conditionals: the unlimited if and the limited to the extent that. The combination is logically redundant. | ||
Consider these somewhat made up, but plausible alternatives: | |||
{{quote|“A Party may disclose the Confidential Information ''if'' required by any law, court or regulatory agency ...” }} | |||
And | |||
{{quote|“A Party may disclose the Confidential Information ''to the extent'' required by any law, court or regulatory agency ...” }} | |||
The first, on a strict reading, permits disclosure of all Confidential Information should any of it be required, but none if it is not; the second allows disclosure of only the Confidential Information that is reasonably required (and if none is required, none). | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[If]] | *[[If]] | ||