May, but shall not be obliged to: Difference between revisions

May, but shall not be obliged to (view source)

661 bytes added , 1 February 2021

no edit summary

82,891

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-Redundancy. [[Celery]]. The [[bleeding obvious]].
+{{a|plainenglish|}}Redundancy. [[Celery]]. The [[bleeding obvious]].
-Timid drafting for [[Mediocre lawyer|members of the legal profession]] whose mastery of the language in which they ply their craft is so compromised as to struggle with the difference between [[may]] and [[must]].
+Timid drafting for [[legal eagle|members of the legal profession]] whose mastery of the language in which they ply their craft is so compromised as to struggle with the difference between [[may]] and [[must]].
 Don’t be that person.
-“[[May]]” confers an ''[[option]]'', not an ''[[obligation]]''.
+“[[May]]” confers an ''[[option]]'', not an ''[[obligation]]''. There is one time that you should use this expression in a contract: when you are conferring on a party a right that party ''would not otherwise have''. “Party A ''may'' cross Party B’s private land to access the roadway” is a good use of the word “may”. “Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing ''[which is about something else altogether]'', and [[for the avoidance of doubt]], Party B ''may'' telephone his elderly aunt at any time without limitation” is ''not'' a good use of “may”, or the trees on which such a pointless sentence may, [[for the time being]] and [[from time to time]], be printed.
+{{sa}}
+*[[Shall be entitled to]]
-{{plainenglish}}