Template:Indemnity description: Difference between revisions

Template:Indemnity description (view source)

Revision as of 16:50, 19 March 2017

37 bytes added , 19 March 2017

→‎It does not require a breach of contract

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,853

edits

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 An {{tag|indemnity}} is no ''better'' than a contractual claim. It ''is'' a contractual claim. It does not have a harsher accounting impact. Its [[regulatory capital|capital]] treatment is the same. You enforce it as you would a breach of contract: by suing the [[indemnifier]] for its failure to pay the indemnified amount. Since (if well crafted) it is a claim to pay a pre-defined (or at any rate [[deterministic]]) sum, proving your claim is not hard and a well-crafted indemnity is apt for [[summary judgment]]. But careful, [[Mediocre lawyer|counsel]]: aptness for [[summary judgment]] is not a magic property of all [[indemnities]]: it depends on how well you have crafted yours.
-=====It does ''not'' require a breach of contract=====
+=====It does ''not'' require a [[breach of contract]]=====
-Meanwhile, note a point of profound importance. While failing to honour an indemnity claim is a contractual breach, the circumstances giving rise to one is not. One need allege no breach and prove no loss to make a claim under a (well-crafted) indemnity. No [[causation]] is required, no value judgment needed to satisfy the [[indemnifier]] of your bona fides: all you need prove is:
+Meanwhile, note a point of profound importance. While ''failing to honour'' an [[indemnity]] claim is a [[breach of contract]], the circumstances giving rise to an [[indemnity claim]] are ''not''. One need allege no breach nor prove any loss to claim under a (well-crafted) indemnity. No [[causation]] is required, no value judgment needed to satisfy the [[indemnifier]] of your ''bona fides'': all you need prove is:
-*There is an [[indemnity]]
+*You have an [[indemnity]]
 *The [[indemnified event]] has happened;
 *You have calculated the [[indemnified sum]].
+Recovering for a failure to honour a (well-crafted) [[indemnity]] is therefore straightforward: You must show these things have happened, that you have demanded the [[indemnified sum]] from [[indemnifier]]; and that the [[indemnifier]] has not paid it.
-Recovering for a failure to honour a (well-crafted) [[indemnity]] is therefore straightforward: You must attest to the above, and the following:
-*You have demanded the [[indemnified sum]] from [[indemnifier]]; and
-*The [[indemnifier]] has not paid it.
 =====It is not (necessarily) of indeterminate scope=====