82,891
edits
Reliance on legal advice: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
{{quote| | {{quote| | ||
'''Agent may seek legal advice'''<br> | '''Agent may seek legal advice'''<br> | ||
The Agent may from time to time seek and rely upon advice from professional advisers ''and will not be liable for any action taken or [[Act or omission|not taken]] in reliance upon that advice''.}} | The Agent may from time to time seek and rely upon advice from professional advisers ''and will not be liable for any action taken or [[Act or omission|not taken]] in reliance upon that advice''.<ref>The SPIRE version, for completists, is as follows: | ||
{{quote| | |||
The Trustee may act and rely on the opinion, advice of, report, confirmation, certificate or information (collectively, “'''Advice'''”) obtained from, any lawyer, valuer, accountant (including auditors), surveyor, banker, broker, auctioneer or other expert (each an “'''Expert'''”) (provided that, if the Trustee appointed such Expert, the Trustee has exercised [[reasonable]] care in the selection, retention and use of such Expert), irrespective of whether such Advice or (in the case of limb (ii)) any engagement letter (i) is obtained by or addressed to the Issuer, the Trustee or any other person or (ii) contains a monetary limit on liability or limits the scope and/or basis of such Advice. Any such Advice may be sent or obtained by letter, fax or electronic communication ''and the Trustee shall not be liable to anyone for acting in good faith on any Advice purporting to be conveyed by such means even if it contains some error or is not authentic''.}} | |||
Purporting to be conveyed is a sublime piece of ''[[wieselspielerei]]''. | |||
</ref>}} | |||
This may strike you as cavalier. But, should you protest, expect to hear the agent’s legal advisers sagely intoning that, yes, this is absolutely standard in the market and non-negotiable, being a simple and effective allocation of risk by a service provider who gets paid a pittance and otherwise does not share in the fruits of the transaction. | This may strike you as cavalier. But, should you protest, expect to hear the agent’s legal advisers sagely intoning that, yes, this is absolutely standard in the market and non-negotiable, being a simple and effective allocation of risk by a service provider who gets paid a pittance and otherwise does not share in the fruits of the transaction. | ||