Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
And you don’t think this could be equally applied to British ‘acting in the spirit"?
"Acting in the spirit" is just an excuse used by people trying to weasel out of their responsibilities - contracts/agreements/treaties are worded to be clear and precise, and to avoid ambiguity, and if things are unambiguous, you can’t say "well, I want it to mean something different because that suits me"…
"Acting in the spirit of the agreement" does not mean taking unilateral action which breaches the Agreement.
|
Why are you continually batting for the other side, Hugh?
I believe that if one party is deliberately construing a contract in a way that was not a reasonable interpretation of what it meant, the other side is perfectly entitled to call foul.
I have already cited the example of the EU insistence that each sandwich must be separately labelled on a consignment, instead of having one label for each batch of like sandwiches. Are you trying to defend that infantile interpretation of what was supposed to have been agreed?
Too much bureaucracy kills off private enterprise. That’s why the EU is doing this.