82,891
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|boilerplate | {{a|boilerplate|The classic [[successors and assigns]] formulation:<br>{{subtable|“This agreement is binding upon, and [[inure]]s to the benefit of, the parties and their respective permitted successors and assigns.”}}}}The JC’s love for the tedial minutiae of [[boilerplate]] is deep, but when it comes to pedagogical rigour, he is no match — there ''is'' no match, frankly — for the redoubtable [[Ken Adams]], author of {{br|A Manual of Style for the Drafting of Contacts}}. | ||
Mr Adams’ violets don’t shrink. Not for him | As we all know by now, Mr. Adams’ violets don’t shrink. Not for ''him'' the JC’s preferred M.O. of dashing off a couple of lazy paragraphs to mock the feckless vacuity of a time-worn legal catchphrase. Indeed, no: Mr. Adams prefers the all-out frontal thermonuclear attack. His medium of choice: the peer-reviewed academic monograph. | ||
He did one about [[successors and assigns]] in the June 2013 issue of ''Which! Advocate'', and I cannot improve on it in any way, so simply [https://www.adamsdrafting.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Advocate-Successors-Assigns-June-July-2013.pdf commend it to you | He did one about [[successors and assigns]] in the June 2013 issue of ''Which! Advocate'', and I cannot improve on it in any way, so simply [https://www.adamsdrafting.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Advocate-Successors-Assigns-June-July-2013.pdf commend it to you]. | ||
Ms Stark, charitably, supposes the origin of “[[successors and assigns]]” to be so obscure and its modern form so truncated “that its objectives are | There are ''seven'' possible justifications for a successors and assigns clause, Mr. Adams patiently explains; five can be found in Tina L. Stark’s 700-page monster ''{{plainlink|https://store.lexisnexis.com/products/negotiating-and-drafting-contract-boilerplate-skuSKU10180493alm|Negotiating and Drafting Contract Boilerplate}}'' — now ''there’s'' a dinner party of the spheres — and Mr. Adams has imagineered up a couple more. In his meticulous, stone-turning fashion, he persuades us: ''not a one of them makes a jot of sense''. | ||
Ms Stark, charitably, supposes the origin of “[[successors and assigns]]” clause to be so obscure and its modern form so truncated “that its objectives are veiled”: since no-one knows what it is for and it does no harm, as is ''de rigueur'' among fearful [[legal eagles]], what one doesn’t understand one is best to leave well alone. Hence its improbable survival, a male nipple for the legal set. | |||
Mr. Adams is having none of that, and lunges instead at [[Occam’s razor]]: | Mr. Adams is having none of that, and lunges instead at [[Occam’s razor]]: | ||
Line 12: | Line 14: | ||
Ouch! Tarry not. Strike it from your contracts! | Ouch! Tarry not. Strike it from your contracts! | ||
{{sa}} | |||
* {{br|A Manual of Style for the Drafting of Contacts}} |