|
Verbal Contracts; Not worth the paper they're written on
|
|
Topic Started: Aug 7 2013, 05:00 PM (817 Views)
|
|
dsch15
|
Aug 8 2013, 11:12 PM
Post #21
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,527
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Jul 5, 2013
|
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 8 2013, 07:42 PM
- santry_gooner
- Aug 8 2013, 11:35 AM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 10:14 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 07:30 PM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 06:14 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:37 PM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 05:32 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:28 PM
Breaker Morant is on the JODB Top 20 All-time movies list. There is a scene where Captain Taylor, the liaison from Lord Kitchener's office to the Bushveldt Carbineers, is asked about orders from high command to execute all prisoners. His reply? "There was (pause) an understanding."
Whether or not Suarez has a written clause to enforce here, if indeed there was an "understanding" between he and Liverpool that is now being violated by the club, he would have no reason to remain loyal to them, and most of the public outside of Liverpool would not begrudge him a move to a CL team.
Given what we know about Suarez generally, I think any description by him of an "understanding" between him and Liverpool has to be taken with a grain of salt. Probably several.
In most cases, I'd caution folks not to let off-field behavior by players color their opinions of them on the field. Reverse here I guess.
I'm keeping the two separate. In the current context my reference to what we know about him generally is that he has twice before forced a club to let him move. Nothing to do with his on field felonies and misdemeanors. Edit - may have overstated the case with regard to his move from Ajax to 'pool. Not changing my mind, though!
If indeed there was an "understanding" about CL footy, then anyone casting Suarez as disloyal would be "overstating (their) case." I always suspected that you were a "Marxist." So am I.
All hail Marx & Lennon!
While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover, isn't it "Lenin" you were talking about? "While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover..." Not sure what you meant by that amigo, but two things that most folks around here will agree that we share in common is the often rare combination of intelligence and likability. You, not so much. PS - I'm sure my pal from SoCal spelled "Lennon" just the way he meant to. Is your motor stuck on "PRICK?" Perhaps this will help clarify things: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCzgdF_WjOg. No need to take a swipe at santry - I don't think these guys are well known in Ireland.
"The Further Adventures of Nick Danger" - one of my all time favorites - starts at about 28:30.
Edited by dsch15, Aug 8 2013, 11:16 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
santry_gooner
|
Aug 9 2013, 01:23 AM
Post #22
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,772
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #13
- Joined:
- Jul 4, 2013
|
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 8 2013, 07:42 PM
- santry_gooner
- Aug 8 2013, 11:35 AM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 10:14 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 07:30 PM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 06:14 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:37 PM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 05:32 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:28 PM
Breaker Morant is on the JODB Top 20 All-time movies list. There is a scene where Captain Taylor, the liaison from Lord Kitchener's office to the Bushveldt Carbineers, is asked about orders from high command to execute all prisoners. His reply? "There was (pause) an understanding."
Whether or not Suarez has a written clause to enforce here, if indeed there was an "understanding" between he and Liverpool that is now being violated by the club, he would have no reason to remain loyal to them, and most of the public outside of Liverpool would not begrudge him a move to a CL team.
Given what we know about Suarez generally, I think any description by him of an "understanding" between him and Liverpool has to be taken with a grain of salt. Probably several.
In most cases, I'd caution folks not to let off-field behavior by players color their opinions of them on the field. Reverse here I guess.
I'm keeping the two separate. In the current context my reference to what we know about him generally is that he has twice before forced a club to let him move. Nothing to do with his on field felonies and misdemeanors. Edit - may have overstated the case with regard to his move from Ajax to 'pool. Not changing my mind, though!
If indeed there was an "understanding" about CL footy, then anyone casting Suarez as disloyal would be "overstating (their) case." I always suspected that you were a "Marxist." So am I.
All hail Marx & Lennon!
While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover, isn't it "Lenin" you were talking about? "While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover..." Not sure what you meant by that amigo, but two things that most folks around here will agree that we share in common is the often rare combination of intelligence and likability. You, not so much. PS - I'm sure my pal from SoCal spelled "Lennon" just the way he meant to. Is your motor stuck on "PRICK?" What happened? Did you suffer some sort of huge setback today, some plan we were hatching didn't come off, did someone simply just let the tyres down on your bike. We are rather tired and emotional.
|
|
|
| |
|
billabog5
|
Aug 9 2013, 02:02 AM
Post #23
|
|
- Posts:
- 8,461
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #39
- Joined:
- Jul 31, 2013
|
A verbal agreement cannot override a written contract, simple
I kinda like Suarez being on the receiving end of dastardly deeds for a change
|
|
|
| |
|
santry_gooner
|
Aug 9 2013, 02:10 AM
Post #24
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,772
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #13
- Joined:
- Jul 4, 2013
|
- billabog5
- Aug 9 2013, 02:02 AM
A verbal agreement cannot override a written contract, simple
I kinda like Suarez being on the receiving end of dastardly deeds for a change Over riding a contract would mean it would have to contradict the contract. This matter is about something additional to the contract. That's quite different but the effect is the same, and ultimately no legal argument is likely to win.
Which now means things will get ugly and Suarez will force the move citing that he has no faith in the verbal undertakings of Rogers and John 'weed' Henry.
I'm sure Bog you are rubbing your hands with glee. This will mean you have a real instance of chicanery that will allow you try to dilute the traditions of decency that true Arsenal fans espouse.
|
|
|
| |
|
gundamn
|
Aug 9 2013, 03:10 AM
Post #25
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,808
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #2
- Joined:
- Jul 3, 2013
|
So true Arsenal fans would boycott the Suarez transfer to uphold the traditions of decency? Gotcha.
|
|
|
| |
|
billabog5
|
Aug 9 2013, 03:32 AM
Post #26
|
|
- Posts:
- 8,461
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #39
- Joined:
- Jul 31, 2013
|
- santry_gooner
- Aug 9 2013, 02:10 AM
- billabog5
- Aug 9 2013, 02:02 AM
A verbal agreement cannot override a written contract, simple
I kinda like Suarez being on the receiving end of dastardly deeds for a change
Over riding a contract would mean it would have to contradict the contract. This matter is about something additional to the contract. That's quite different but the effect is the same, and ultimately no legal argument is likely to win. Which now means things will get ugly and Suarez will force the move citing that he has no faith in the verbal undertakings of Rogers and John 'weed' Henry. I'm sure Bog you are rubbing your hands with glee. This will mean you have a real instance of chicanery that will allow you try to dilute the traditions of decency that true Arsenal fans espouse. Shame your club don't 'espouse" those same traditions of decency that you "true" Arsenal fans do
I take it from your comments that you don't class those who want Suarez at Arsenal as true fans
Personally, I don't give a hoot about your pompous , idiotic rhetoric , Arsenal are morally no better or worse than any other club , I will however enjoy ramming your signature down your throat
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Aug 9 2013, 04:18 AM
Post #27
|
|
Deleted User
|
- billabog5
- Aug 9 2013, 03:32 AM
- santry_gooner
- Aug 9 2013, 02:10 AM
- billabog5
- Aug 9 2013, 02:02 AM
A verbal agreement cannot override a written contract, simple
I kinda like Suarez being on the receiving end of dastardly deeds for a change
Over riding a contract would mean it would have to contradict the contract. This matter is about something additional to the contract. That's quite different but the effect is the same, and ultimately no legal argument is likely to win. Which now means things will get ugly and Suarez will force the move citing that he has no faith in the verbal undertakings of Rogers and John 'weed' Henry. I'm sure Bog you are rubbing your hands with glee. This will mean you have a real instance of chicanery that will allow you try to dilute the traditions of decency that true Arsenal fans espouse.
Shame your club don't 'espouse" those same traditions of decency that you "true" Arsenal fans do I take it from your comments that you don't class those who want Suarez at Arsenal as true fans Personally, I don't give a hoot about your pompous , idiotic rhetoric , Arsenal are morally no better or worse than any other club , I will however enjoy ramming your signature down your throat Apart from the fact that those that want Suarez are not "true" arsenal fans, since Wenger wants him too we can also count him as not being a "true" fan or supporter of the club.
|
|
|
| |
|
rasjamaican
|
Aug 9 2013, 09:26 AM
Post #28
|
|
- Posts:
- 494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #32
- Joined:
- Jul 15, 2013
|
- santry_gooner
- Aug 8 2013, 11:33 AM
- rasjamaican
- Aug 8 2013, 09:39 AM
- anelka_henry
- Aug 8 2013, 08:41 AM
- jays712
- Aug 7 2013, 05:30 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:28 PM
Breaker Morant is on the JODB Top 20 All-time movies list. There is a scene where Captain Taylor, the liaison from Lord Kitchener's office to the Bushveldt Carbineers, is asked about orders from high command to execute all prisoners. His reply? "There was (pause) an understanding."
Whether or not Suarez has a written clause to enforce here, if indeed there was an "understanding" between he and Liverpool that is now being violated by the club, he would have no reason to remain loyal to them, and most of the public outside of Liverpool would not begrudge him a move to a CL team.
He can use this "understanding" to slam Pool all he wants. It may still help him to force a move. What it won't do is stand up in front of a judge anywhere.
If there were witnesses to the said 'understanding' it will stand! Finding such witnesses and getting them to testify might be the hard part... Verbal contracts are still very much enforceable just harder to prove than written ones.
That's true and from a purely legal perspective verbal contracts can be enforceable once the promisee can show that there are significant acts of part performance as well as detrimental reliance on a promise form the promisor. However, a verbal contract will almost never be enforceable if it was made parallel with a written contract. If the parties went out of their way to make an agreement between themselves written then it is inferred that only what is contained in the written agreement was intended to bind the parties. If Liverpool really did make this promise to Suarez and his agent/lawyer was aware of it then they should have ensured that it was incorporated as a clause in the contract. However I am pretty sure Liverpool would not have put such a clause in a player's contract.
You can always, always, always tell the difference in a qualified opinion. I don't know how your profession requires it RAS but you have a sound grasp of the tenets of contract law, which while different from country to country, do have universal features. Now, here's what I understand from my own legal experience, limited as it may be. A judge is required to look at matters where parties have given conditional undertakings, so one does have a rght to have a verbal agreement vindicated. However, as RAS points out Suarez identifies that the verbal undertaking was given at the same time as a written contract which makes no reference to the undertaking. A judge will look at this contemporaneous agreement as an over-riding consideration, and will generally conclude that both parties had the opportunity to make it an element of the contract. In other words, Suarez had the opportunity to have it as a consideration in a written contract with the club. The Judge will then [likely] conclude that the undertaking was not a serious enough requirement to include in the contract opportunity, and was therefore unimportant to Suarez. It won't matter whether Brendan Rogers got down on all fours and recited the undertaking in song - it is not a legal requirement.
- Quote:
-
"I don't know how your profession requires it RAS but you have a sound grasp of the tenets of contract law, which while different from country to country, do have universal features."
I am a "lawyer in training", I am currently at Law School in Jamaica and I will be called to the bar next year. Jamaica is a Commonwealth country so our principles in relation to contract law were essentially adopted from the English common law.
|
|
|
| |
|
JustOneDennisBergkamp
|
Aug 9 2013, 11:23 AM
Post #29
|
|
JODB
- Posts:
- 13,965
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Jul 3, 2013
|
- dsch15
- Aug 8 2013, 11:12 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 8 2013, 07:42 PM
- santry_gooner
- Aug 8 2013, 11:35 AM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 10:14 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 07:30 PM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 06:14 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:37 PM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 05:32 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:28 PM
Breaker Morant is on the JODB Top 20 All-time movies list. There is a scene where Captain Taylor, the liaison from Lord Kitchener's office to the Bushveldt Carbineers, is asked about orders from high command to execute all prisoners. His reply? "There was (pause) an understanding."
Whether or not Suarez has a written clause to enforce here, if indeed there was an "understanding" between he and Liverpool that is now being violated by the club, he would have no reason to remain loyal to them, and most of the public outside of Liverpool would not begrudge him a move to a CL team.
Given what we know about Suarez generally, I think any description by him of an "understanding" between him and Liverpool has to be taken with a grain of salt. Probably several.
In most cases, I'd caution folks not to let off-field behavior by players color their opinions of them on the field. Reverse here I guess.
I'm keeping the two separate. In the current context my reference to what we know about him generally is that he has twice before forced a club to let him move. Nothing to do with his on field felonies and misdemeanors. Edit - may have overstated the case with regard to his move from Ajax to 'pool. Not changing my mind, though!
If indeed there was an "understanding" about CL footy, then anyone casting Suarez as disloyal would be "overstating (their) case." I always suspected that you were a "Marxist." So am I.
All hail Marx & Lennon!
While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover, isn't it "Lenin" you were talking about? "While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover..." Not sure what you meant by that amigo, but two things that most folks around here will agree that we share in common is the often rare combination of intelligence and likability. You, not so much. PS - I'm sure my pal from SoCal spelled "Lennon" just the way he meant to. Is your motor stuck on "PRICK?"
Perhaps this will help clarify things: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCzgdF_WjOg. No need to take a swipe at santry - I don't think these guys are well known in Ireland. "The Further Adventures of Nick Danger" - one of my all time favorites - starts at about 28:30. "What is all this brouhaha?"
"Brouhaha? Hahahahahaha!"
I listened to them myself while getting baked with my mates in the late seventies, but it required no familiarity with their material to know that you had spelled "Lennon" as you intended. In the context of the little funny that we were sharing, it was plain as Doris Day.
That Santry felt the need to come into our conversation with his big red correction marker and was completely wrong is merely humorous, but the reason that I took not one, but two "swipes" at him was for this subtle "swipe" pointed in our direction:
"While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover..."
I fear that his power switch is firmly stuck at this point.
|
|
|
| |
|
dsch15
|
Aug 9 2013, 12:21 PM
Post #30
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,527
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Jul 5, 2013
|
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 9 2013, 11:23 AM
- dsch15
- Aug 8 2013, 11:12 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 8 2013, 07:42 PM
- santry_gooner
- Aug 8 2013, 11:35 AM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 10:14 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 07:30 PM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 06:14 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:37 PM
- dsch15
- Aug 7 2013, 05:32 PM
- JustOneDennisBergkamp
- Aug 7 2013, 05:28 PM
Breaker Morant is on the JODB Top 20 All-time movies list. There is a scene where Captain Taylor, the liaison from Lord Kitchener's office to the Bushveldt Carbineers, is asked about orders from high command to execute all prisoners. His reply? "There was (pause) an understanding."
Whether or not Suarez has a written clause to enforce here, if indeed there was an "understanding" between he and Liverpool that is now being violated by the club, he would have no reason to remain loyal to them, and most of the public outside of Liverpool would not begrudge him a move to a CL team.
Given what we know about Suarez generally, I think any description by him of an "understanding" between him and Liverpool has to be taken with a grain of salt. Probably several.
In most cases, I'd caution folks not to let off-field behavior by players color their opinions of them on the field. Reverse here I guess.
I'm keeping the two separate. In the current context my reference to what we know about him generally is that he has twice before forced a club to let him move. Nothing to do with his on field felonies and misdemeanors. Edit - may have overstated the case with regard to his move from Ajax to 'pool. Not changing my mind, though!
If indeed there was an "understanding" about CL footy, then anyone casting Suarez as disloyal would be "overstating (their) case." I always suspected that you were a "Marxist." So am I.
All hail Marx & Lennon!
While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover, isn't it "Lenin" you were talking about? "While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover..." Not sure what you meant by that amigo, but two things that most folks around here will agree that we share in common is the often rare combination of intelligence and likability. You, not so much. PS - I'm sure my pal from SoCal spelled "Lennon" just the way he meant to. Is your motor stuck on "PRICK?"
Perhaps this will help clarify things: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCzgdF_WjOg. No need to take a swipe at santry - I don't think these guys are well known in Ireland. "The Further Adventures of Nick Danger" - one of my all time favorites - starts at about 28:30.
"What is all this brouhaha?" "Brouhaha? Hahahahahaha!" I listened to them myself while getting baked with my mates in the late seventies, but it required no familiarity with their material to know that you had spelled "Lennon" as you intended. In the context of the little funny that we were sharing, it was plain as Doris Day. That Santry felt the need to come into our conversation with his big red correction marker and was completely wrong is merely humorous, but the reason that I took not one, but two "swipes" at him was for this subtle "swipe" pointed in our direction: "While I'm sure you chaps share many things that we may never discover..."I fear that his power switch is firmly stuck at this point. The correction was gently done and I might well have offered the same if I didn't know about the Firesign Theatre.
More importantly, it's great to find another fan. I think I may hit Amazon up for a copy of "Don't Crush that Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers".
"C-c-c-coming mother!"
Edited by dsch15, Aug 9 2013, 12:22 PM.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|