Promptly: Difference between revisions

Promptly (view source)

Revision as of 12:47, 19 November 2019

8 bytes removed , 19 November 2019

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 :''[[In the event that]] Party A makes any material changes to its investment policies it [[shall]] be [[obligated]] to {{strike|immediately}}{{insert|as soon as reasonably practicable}} notify Party B.
-What does “immediately”, as used here, even mean? Do we expect poor benighted Party A to be in [[fundamental breach]] should it fail to advise Party B at the instant — measured upon an atomic clock — that the alteration to said investment policy is formally approved in the institution’s minutes?
+What does “immediately”, as used here, even mean? Do we expect poor benighted Party A to be in [[fundamental breach]] should it fail to advise Party B at the utter microscopic instant, measured upon an atomic clock, that the change is formally approved in the institution’s minutes?
-No? Then within what period can one dither and still be thought of as in the moment?
+No? Then within what period can one dither and still be thought of as sufficiently in the moment to be “immediate”?
-You might think Party A needs ''some'' time to collect itself, canter back to the office, fish the Rolodex out of the drawer, find Party A’s number, clear its throat, wait for Party A to pick up the line and exchange some human pleasantries before imparting this vital news. If so, you might ask yourself just how different that sense of “[[immediately]]” is to “[[as soon as reasonably practicable]]”. Not very, is your correspondent’s opinion.
+Surely Party A needs ''some'' time to collect itself, canter back to the office, fish out its Rolodex, find Party A’s number, clear its throat, wait for Party A to pick up the line and exchange some pleasantries before imparting this vital news. If so, you might ask yourself just how different that sense of “[[immediately]]” is to “[[as soon as reasonably practicable]]”. ''Not very'', is your correspondent’s opinion.
 In any case, unless Party B is both gagging to close this poor fund, and possessed of some unnatural intelligence as to its precise internal workings, as a covenant it is literally unenforceable in any case. Here are the possible scenarios after Party A changes its investment policy: