Finance contract: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 51: Line 51:
| [[No oral modification]] || Prevents one of your salesguys from modifying the agreement by casual, drunken conversation in a bar ||A self-contradictory stricture on an [[amendment agreement]], until 2018 understood to be fluff put in a contract to appease the lawyers and guarantee them a tedious annuity. But as of 2018, thanks to {{Casenote|Rock Advertising Limited|MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited}} if one ''says'' one cannot amend a contract except in writing then one will be held to that — even if on the clear evidence the parties to the contract later agreed otherwise.  
| [[No oral modification]] || Prevents one of your salesguys from modifying the agreement by casual, drunken conversation in a bar ||A self-contradictory stricture on an [[amendment agreement]], until 2018 understood to be fluff put in a contract to appease the lawyers and guarantee them a tedious annuity. But as of 2018, thanks to {{Casenote|Rock Advertising Limited|MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited}} if one ''says'' one cannot amend a contract except in writing then one will be held to that — even if on the clear evidence the parties to the contract later agreed otherwise.  


This is rather like sober me being obliged to act on promises that drunk me made to a handsome ''[[rechtsanwältin]]'' during a argument about [[Schwarzschild radius of alcohol consumption|theoretical physics]] in a nasty bar in Hammersmith after the end-of-year do, which that elegant German attorney can not even remember me making, let alone wishing to see performed.<ref>I know this sounds oddly, ''verisimilitudinally'' specific, but it actually isn’t. I really did just make it up.</ref> Hold my beer. Again, if your contract, and your [[regulatory capital]] treatment, involves the payment of tends of millions of dollars on specific days, by reference to oblique and tendentious reference events over which your [[legal eagle]]s have slaved for months, you don’t want a cretinous [[salesperson]] accidentally detonating your [[leverage ratio]] by having agreed to change them — or even been alleged to have done so — during a well-lubricated trip to the greyhounds at Walthamstow.  
This is rather like sober me being obliged to act on promises that drunk me made to a handsome ''[[rechtsanwältin]]'' during a argument about [[Schwarzschild radius of alcohol consumption|theoretical physics]] in a nasty bar in Hammersmith after the end-of-year do, which that elegant German attorney can not even remember me making, let alone wishing to see performed.<ref>I know this sounds oddly, ''verisimilitudinally'' specific, but it actually isn’t. I really did just make it up.</ref> Hold my beer. Again, if your contract, and your [[regulatory capital]] treatment, involves the payment of tens of millions of dollars on specific days, by reference to oblique and tendentious reference events over which your [[legal eagle]]s have slaved for months, you don’t want a cretinous [[salesperson]] accidentally detonating your [[leverage ratio]] by having agreed to change them — or even been alleged to have done so — during a well-lubricated trip to the greyhounds at Walthamstow.  


Not such a big concern, we submit, if you’re delivering double glazing, or licensing software, where the ability to agree changes on the fly without having to oblige the tedious wordwrights of the supreme court is surely a good thing.
Not such a big concern, we submit, if you’re delivering double glazing, or licensing software, where the ability to agree changes on the fly without having to oblige the tedious wordwrights of the supreme court is surely a good thing.