Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc: Difference between revisions

Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc (view source)

5 bytes removed , 15 August 2016

82,890

edits

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 ===[[Email]] is not an [[electronic messaging system]]?===
-This was the hinge point of the case: does [[email] count as an [[electronic messaging system]] under {{1992isdama}}? No, thought Andrews J. because:
+This was the hinge point of the case: does [[email] count as an [[electronic messaging system]] under {{1992ma}}? No, thought Andrews J. because:
 {{box|“In 1992, email was not in common use and thus the reference to “[[electronic messaging system]]” is unlikely to have been intended to include it.”}}
@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 The court does not seem to have heard any evidence on this point. A cursory glance at Wikipedia would suggest this is wildly wrong: the SMTP protocol, over which email is still transferred today, was published in 1982. It is true that the '''expression''' “email” didn’t enter the lexicon until 1993 – ''but that is consistent with nascent email being treated as a kind of [[electronic messaging system]]''.
-Andrews J compared with the equivalent provision in the {{2002ma}}. This '''does'' include [[email]], as a separate item from “[[electronic messaging system]]”:
+Andrews J compared with the equivalent provision in the {{2002ma}}. This ''does'' include [[email]], as a separate item from “[[electronic messaging system]]”:
 {{box|{{ISDA Master Agreement 2002 12}}}}