82,446
edits
Netting opinion: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:“According to legal literature, [[forward contract|forward contracts]] (''marchés a terme'') are [[synallagmatic]] (that is, the parties enter into mutual commitments, each binding itself to the other) and onerous contracts (that is, one party gives or promises something as a [[consideration]] for the commitment of the other party) and contain an [[aleatory]] element (''contrat aléatoire'').”<ref>What this seems to be saying is these arrangements involve [[mutual obligations]] and [[consideration]] — in other words, they are “legal [[contract|contracts]]”, and the parties address themselves to a chance (“[[aleatory]]”) element outside their mutual control: that is, they’re “''[[derivative]] [[contract]]s''”.</ref> | :“According to legal literature, [[forward contract|forward contracts]] (''marchés a terme'') are [[synallagmatic]] (that is, the parties enter into mutual commitments, each binding itself to the other) and onerous contracts (that is, one party gives or promises something as a [[consideration]] for the commitment of the other party) and contain an [[aleatory]] element (''contrat aléatoire'').”<ref>What this seems to be saying is these arrangements involve [[mutual obligations]] and [[consideration]] — in other words, they are “legal [[contract|contracts]]”, and the parties address themselves to a chance (“[[aleatory]]”) element outside their mutual control: that is, they’re “''[[derivative]] [[contract]]s''”.</ref> | ||
Continental lawyers will immediately recognise this terminology. They will tell you it stems from the [[Civil law|Roman tradition]], or some codex developed by a monk while Hannibal’s elephants trekked through the Dolomites, or something like that. Now we all have our legal folklore, and this is theirs: they learned it during their decades-long | Continental lawyers will immediately recognise this terminology. They will tell you it stems from the [[Civil law|Roman tradition]], or some codex developed by a monk while Hannibal’s elephants trekked through the Dolomites, or something like that. Now we all have our legal folklore, and this is theirs: they learned it during their decades-long internment at the ''Faculté de droit de Paris''. It is their [[Donoghue v Stevenson - Case Note|snail in a gingerbeer]]; their [[Fardell v Potts - Case Note|negligent navigation of a flooded roadway by punt]]; their liability for a [[Ferae naturae|naturally ferocious domestic beast]] which escapes down your mineshaft. | ||
And, make no mistake, there is a strain of [[continental lawyer]] who quietly resents the tidal-wave of Anglo Saxon jurisprudence that has deluged the continent. That all the commercial affairs between a Belgian and an Italian should be adjudicated before the courts of England and Wales. And he is just the sort to make his living — and extract his revenge on the [[Common law|common law tradition]] —writing [[netting opinion]]s. And be assured that spite runs deep. For, when you think even this spiteful Herr must surely have had enough, as you past page 93, and find whole new section about the specific rules around protection of insurance claims under the ''Insurance Sector Act'' you will beat your fists on the ground and say WHY ARE YOU EXPOSTULATING ON THE TOPIC OF FIRE AND GENERAL INSURANCE I SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT. | And, make no mistake, there is a strain of [[continental lawyer]] who quietly resents the tidal-wave of Anglo Saxon jurisprudence that has deluged the continent. That all the commercial affairs between a Belgian and an Italian should be adjudicated before the courts of England and Wales. And he is just the sort to make his living — and extract his revenge on the [[Common law|common law tradition]] —writing [[netting opinion]]s. And be assured that spite runs deep. For, when you think even this spiteful Herr must surely have had enough, as you past page 93, and find whole new section about the specific rules around protection of insurance claims under the ''Insurance Sector Act'' you will beat your fists on the ground and say WHY ARE YOU EXPOSTULATING ON THE TOPIC OF FIRE AND GENERAL INSURANCE I SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT. | ||