82,891
edits
Template:Indemnity description: Difference between revisions
→Many indemnities aren’t very well-crafted at all
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
The sky should not fall in under the weight of a well-proportioned {{tag|indemnity}}. It is a precision tool to allocate responsibility for a narrow risk, not a weapon of mass destruction. | The sky should not fall in under the weight of a well-proportioned {{tag|indemnity}}. It is a precision tool to allocate responsibility for a narrow risk, not a weapon of mass destruction. | ||
==== | ====You keep saying “if well-crafted”==== | ||
Yes, I do. This is where things have gone awry. Many latter-day [[indemnities]] are not well-crafted at all. It is common for indemnities to catch every contingency under the sun: “any and all losses, costs and damages, howsoever arising, incurred or suffered in diligent performance of the contract”. (An [[indemnified party]] showing uncommon largesse might let the [[indemnifier]] off those losses caused by its own [[negligence, fraud or wilful default]], but that’s another whole story.) | |||
In any case, if you’re asked for something as mad as that, refuse, for it implies your counterpart has not grasped the fundamentals of a commercial bargain: shouldering the losses and costs naturally arising from the diligent performance of contractual obligations — the ordinary vicissitudes of one’s day-to-day commercial existence, that is to say — well, it’s kind of the point. That is why you’re even at the table. | In any case, if you’re asked for something as mad as that, refuse, for it implies your counterpart has not grasped the fundamentals of a commercial bargain: shouldering the losses and costs naturally arising from the diligent performance of contractual obligations — the ordinary vicissitudes of one’s day-to-day commercial existence, that is to say — well, it’s kind of the point. That is why you’re even at the table. | ||