You might recall this post from last October, when I managed to come up with a contract extract showing how using the dreaded defined term this Agreement might help avoid confusion, assuming you’re really, really incompetent. Well, thanks to an informant buried in the contracts deep state, I now bring you something comparable, the image at the top of this post. Here’s the relevant bit:
Unless the context otherwise requires, any other document or agreement that refers to the Agreement shall be deemed to refer to the Agreement after giving effect to this Agreement (and any other Agreements to the Agreement made from time to time pursuant to its terms).
As my informant noted wryly, “It’s a good thing the drafter defined ‘Agreement’.” It’s the parenthetical that put me over the top.
From the wording, it strongly looks like some of the ‘Agreements’ were supposed to be ‘amendments’.
I.E.: Unless the context otherwise requires, any other document or agreement
that refers to the Agreement shall be deemed to refer to the Agreement
after giving effect to this amendment (and any other amendments to the
Agreement made from time to time pursuant to its terms).
re-worded that way, it at least makes sense, even if it still violates your principle regarding the use of ‘Agreement’ as a defined term.
Yes, I noticed that, but I appreciated the extra messedupness it added.
Ken:
Wow. Given the rest of the context, did it mean something like this?
Chris
You routinely try to understand stuff that I run away from. Yes, I think you’re right, but I suspect that how those other documents refer to this whatever-one-calls-it would presumably be dispositive. And “unless the context otherwise requires” is the kiss of death.
“unless the context otherwise requires” is
the kiss of deathhow a lawsuit gets its wings. FTFY