What if: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 14: Line 14:


{{plainenglish}}
{{plainenglish}}
{{c|Drafting|Risk}}
{{c2|Drafting|Risk}}

Revision as of 13:04, 12 June 2018

Oh, the fertile, febrile mind of a transactional lawyer.

Part of the paranoid delight of transactional drafting is catering for unforeseen contingencies. To do this, the draftsperson has many tools at her disposal: force majeure clauses, indemnities, termination rights, and a propensity to draft ornate, byzantine valuation dispute clauses.

But there remains in all of these a guiding principle: one should only address contingencies now that cannot predictably be resolved later — that is to say, in the unlikely event they arise. For those contingencies, one has a simpler approach: amendment. For the certainty gained by catering for these contingencies comes at the cost of length, complexity, aggravation and, well, cost of finalising your contract.

See also


Plain English Anatomy™ Noun | Verb | Adjective | Adverb | Preposition | Conjunction | Latin | Germany | Flannel | Legal triplicate | Nominalisation | Murder your darlings