82,469
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A kind of [[profound ontological uncertainty]] which leads to proliferating [[incluso]]s and [[for the avoidance of doubt]]s, is the [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]]'s reluctance to grasp a simple proposition: ''You don’t have positively document what you are not obliged do in a legal contract''. In the absence of a contract you are not obliged to do ''anything''. | A kind of [[profound ontological uncertainty]] which leads to proliferating [[incluso]]s and [[for the avoidance of doubt]]s, is the [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]]'s reluctance to grasp a simple proposition: ''You don’t have positively document what you are not obliged do in a legal contract''. In the absence of a contract you are not obliged to do ''anything''. | ||
Which brings us to Nasty. {{video nasty}} | |||
This is the lawyer's take on that old philosophical adage: [[the onus of proof is on the person making an existential claim]]. | This is the lawyer's take on that old philosophical adage: [[the onus of proof is on the person making an existential claim]]. |