4 ms·
Most words have multiple definitions, hence legal definitions.
by PrimHelios 9y ago
Most words have multiple definitions, hence legal definitions.
- melicerte 9y agoI'm not telling definition should totally be avoided but when you write (technical documentation for instance), you often want to define some specific words. It uselessly extends the document and might confuse your reader.
- drdaeman 9y agoLegalese tend to define things even if that seems absurdly excessive and obvious. IANAL but I've read recently that it's like that because of contra proferentem principle[1]. It's basically a defense against a chance someone may invent some interpretation (different from what's intended) that would look plausible enough. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra_proferentem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra_proferentem
- walshemj 9y agoyes there is one big case in the uk concerning pensions the outcome depended on what seemed to a layperson trivial wording differences in the scheme of arrangement
- drdaeman 9y agoInteresting. Can you please share a link to this story, if you have one?
- walshemj 9y agoIts in connection with BT Section B and later DB pesnions https://www.ftadviser.com/pensions/2017/09/25/bt-goes-to-court-over-pension-inflation-switch/ https://www.ftadviser.com/pensions/2017/09/25/bt-goes-to-cou... This switch to CPI was bared a few years before for British coal - the two schemes of arrangement differ in a very minor way - that a lay person would say where identical
- gumby 9y agoA lovely case on this matter was over the leaseholder for the World Trade Center in New York against his insurance company: when two planes hit two buildings was it one event or two? The insurance policy rider specified a per event payout. http://www.economist.com/node/1139548 http://www.economist.com/node/1139548