81,701
edits
Rights cumulative: 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: | ||
Where it ''will'' work, the proposition that “unrelated rights are cumulative where they don’t overlap” goes without saying, so — well, you don’t need it there, either. | Where it ''will'' work, the proposition that “unrelated rights are cumulative where they don’t overlap” goes without saying, so — well, you don’t need it there, either. | ||
===The limited case for rights cumulative: where your legal eagles have made your position worse=== | |||
{{Rights cumulative capsule}} | |||
But “proactively” legislating for defaults, potential defaults and the exercise of drastic rights that follows them is what finance lawyers do. The common law is all well and good: when money is at stake we can be better. Look, we are amongst financiers; we should expect paranoia. | |||
There is an extra piece of paranoia. It is a sort of ''meta''-paranoia. What happens if, in carefully writing down all my drastic default rights I inadvertently undo some ''better'' right that I might have at [[common law]]? The [[common law]] evolves. Who knows what clever tricks it might devise. Does my clever, eagley contract by oversight cut off some better, quicker remedy I might have had just by declaring [[repudiation]] and suing for damages? | |||
Most of the time, you would think, it should not, but if it does, “rights cumulative” is your chosen slug of [[boilerplate]]. | |||
===Statutory rights, copyright and all that stuff=== | |||
I might pass you my manuscript under a [[confidentiality agreement]]: your publication of it in breach of that agreement may entitle me [[contractual damages]], but my direct losses as a result — the traditional measure of contractual [[damages]], of course — might add up to a lot less than your resulting profits — which the [[common law]] might regarded as unreasonably speculative losses beyond the reach of an aggrieved contracting party — as a result. | I might pass you my manuscript under a [[confidentiality agreement]]: your publication of it in breach of that agreement may entitle me [[contractual damages]], but my direct losses as a result — the traditional measure of contractual [[damages]], of course — might add up to a lot less than your resulting profits — which the [[common law]] might regarded as unreasonably speculative losses beyond the reach of an aggrieved contracting party — as a result. | ||
| Line 12: | Line 20: | ||
Where was I? There is no suggestion that a fellow waives her [[copyright]] by signing a [[contract]] (unless the contract clearly ''says'' that), so she should hardly need a [[rights cumulative]] clause to satisfy herself that her rights are cumulative, unless she deliberately waived them, where they won’t be. | Where was I? There is no suggestion that a fellow waives her [[copyright]] by signing a [[contract]] (unless the contract clearly ''says'' that), so she should hardly need a [[rights cumulative]] clause to satisfy herself that her rights are cumulative, unless she deliberately waived them, where they won’t be. | ||
=== | ===Concurrent liabilities?=== | ||
Sometimes, rights arising in different ''magisteria'' of the law ''aren’t'' cumulative. That is inevitable, you should embrace it, and a hastily injected “[[rights cumulative]]” clause is a chocolate teapot anyway. | Sometimes, rights arising in different ''magisteria'' of the law ''aren’t'' cumulative. That is inevitable, you should embrace it, and a hastily injected “[[rights cumulative]]” clause is a chocolate teapot anyway. | ||