82,891
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
“This agreement is governed by German law. I simply cannot opine,” he will say, and look airily towards the work-shy [[rechtsadler]]. “Helmut will have to advise.” | “This agreement is governed by German law. I simply cannot opine,” he will say, and look airily towards the work-shy [[rechtsadler]]. “Helmut will have to advise.” | ||
Now, there ''is'' a veneer of truth about this — a sheen of cover, ''just'' thick enough to rebuff non-specialist [[ | Now, there ''is'' a veneer of truth about this — a sheen of cover, ''just'' thick enough to rebuff a non-specialist [[salesperson]], who may privately be disinclined to believe it. She will harbour a suspicion that the basic precepts of the commercial bargain are, as far as makes any difference, the same whatever legal regime governs them, and that her present lawyer is simply being truculent, lazy or obtuse. But she cannot prove this. Rather brilliantly, nor can her lawyer, for he has no better idea about German law than she does. Nor that matter, can Helmut (assuming you can get a response out of him at all), for he knows nothing of the [[common law]]. | ||
Each apex of this gristly triangle has its own distinct magisterium of expertise, and none overlaps: ''no-one'' has a grasp of German law, English law, ''and'' the intended bargain unprejudiced enough to confirm beyond reasonable doubt the obvious proposition that ''the governing law which applies to the bargain won’t make a fig of difference to the commercial outcome''. | |||
But | But unless you plan to litigate your contract — and if on the day you sign it you ''do'', frankly you have much bigger problems — you might be better advised to compose a clear contract that is not capable of misunderstanding in the first place. | ||