82,469
edits
I never said you couldn’t: 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 4: | Line 4: | ||
Your starting point, therefore, should be that you should ''not'' say what you are not going to do. Because that perversely, might be taken as implying you ''have'' agreed to do something else you forgot to rule out. | Your starting point, therefore, should be that you should ''not'' say what you are not going to do. Because that perversely, might be taken as implying you ''have'' agreed to do something else you forgot to rule out. | ||
The trick comes with trying to peg back a vague, general positive commitment: “The chargor will take all practicable steps to assist the chargee in registering the charge” | The trick comes with trying to peg back a vague, general positive commitment: | ||
:“The chargor will take all practicable steps to assist the chargee in registering the charge” | |||
by using specific restrictions to rein it in: | |||
:“[[for the avoidance of doubt]] in doing so the chargor [[shall]] not be [[obligated]] to breach, transgress or contravene, [[as the case may be]], any statue, law or regulation.” | |||
Of course, the [[prose stylist|prose stylists]] amongst you — all right, my little contrarians, admit it: ''there are none'' — might prefer to draft ''sans doubte'' in the first place. | Of course, the [[prose stylist|prose stylists]] amongst you — all right, my little contrarians, admit it: ''there are none'' — might prefer to draft ''sans doubte'' in the first place. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 13: | ||
Which brings us to ''Nasty''. {{video nasty}} | Which brings us to ''Nasty''. {{video nasty}} | ||
This is the | This is the [[legal eagle]]’s take on that old philosophical adage: [[the onus of proof is on the person making an existential claim]]. | ||
Here is a thought experiment to fortify your resolve to strike [[incluso]]s from your documents: imagine trying to argue the counter-proposition before a court, without willing the ground open up and swallow you. | |||
We can imagine the fun {{jbm}} would have in submissons: | |||
{{court scene|II|iv|stares winsomely at a an odd knot in the panel at the rear of the court, mutely resenting the human race’s inability to invent a good biro|rises suddenly, causing a rent in his trousers that sounds like a passing Ferrari. The Lord Justice blanches. Sir Jerrold clears his throat}} | {{court scene|II|iv|stares winsomely at a an odd knot in the panel at the rear of the court, mutely resenting the human race’s inability to invent a good biro|rises suddenly, causing a rent in his trousers that sounds like a passing Ferrari. The Lord Justice blanches. Sir Jerrold clears his throat}} | ||