Subject to: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|pe|}}A kind of evil twin to “[[notwithstanding anything to the contrary hereinbefore contained]]”, “'''subject to'''” or “subject always to” is special kind of throat-clearing paddery, any preamble prefaced by “subject to” — subject to any provisions herein to the contrary; subject to agreement to the contrary — speaks to nervousness about ones own drafting, or the sacred right of merchants to make and adjust their commercial arrangements as they see fit — the latter nervousness egged on by the rather perverse ruling in {{casenote|Rock Advertising Limited|MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited}} as to the legal effect of [[no oral modification]] clauses.
{{a|pe|}}A kind of evil twin to “[[notwithstanding anything to the contrary hereinbefore contained]]”, “'''subject to'''” or “subject always to” is special kind of throat-clearing paddery, any preamble prefaced this way or its flannelesque variants — subject to any provisions herein to the contrary; subject to agreement to the contrary; that kind of thing — speaks to nervousness about one’s own drafting, or the sacred right of merchants to make and adjust their commercial arrangements as they see fit — the latter nervousness egged on by the perverse ruling in {{casenote|Rock Advertising Limited|MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited}} as to the legal effect of [[no oral modification]] clauses.


“Subject ''always'' to” leaves open the door that other, less fulsomely expressed contingencies might be a bit spotty. Does a mere “subject to” mean things are only “subject ''sometimes'' to” — and if so how should one infer when, and when not?
“Subject ''always'' to” leaves open the door that other, less fulsomely expressed contingencies might be a bit spotty. Does a mere “subject to” mean things are only “subject ''sometimes'' to” — and if so how should one infer when, and when not?

Navigation menu