6 ms·

The EU's approach to resolving this dispute makes absolutely no sense. Regardless of the fact that, this contract does not, to my reading (IANAL), support thei

The EU's approach to resolving this dispute makes absolutely no sense. Regardless of the fact that, this contract does not, to my reading (IANAL), support their position that they have a claim over the UK-produced vaccines: pursuing a legal resolution seems silly because getting a judgement in your favour will take weeks or months. That is far too long for the timelines the EU wants. Then, even if such a judgment is forthcoming - you still aren't that much closer to getting more doses because as any solicitor will tell you, possession is nine tenths of the law and the doses are in the UK. There is no realistic chance of any export occurring without the approval of the UK government. The UK has a very serious outbreak of coronavirus too. Instead of getting on their high horse and starting an enormous public row why don't the EU: a) recognise that this is one of many vaccines and that perhaps, while important, is not singularly important to the effort b) make an arrangement with the UK government to have some kind of expedited access to vaccines? The UK will soon have a surplus of vaccines (and in fact has extra stock already by some accounts - people are being given unused doses). There is an existing trade issue that is causing problems for the UK that I am sure that the UK would like to get sorted... This kind of over-legalistic attitude is how the EU got into this hole in the first place. Waiting for a single purchase agreement was a mistake because the vaccines have (mostly) turned out to be extremely cheap and the fact that many companies are working on vaccines likely means that none will be able to charge over the odds.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
>> Regardless of the fact that, this contract does not, to my reading (IANAL), support their position that they have a claim over the UK-produced vaccines: (...) See my other comment here. IANAL either, but it seems this was part of the agreement. From the pdf above: 5.4 Manufacturing sites AstraZeneca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Vaccine at manufacturing sites located within the EU (which, for the purpose of this Section 5.4 only shall include the United Kingdom) (...) AstraZeneca agreed to use the UK sites to produce vaccines for the EU.
- calpaterson 6y ago
  It's a big step from agreeing to use UK sites as part of "Best Reasonable Efforts" to the EU having the right to recieve certain manufacture from UK sites. Anyway, as I said: it's totally irrelevant as no amount of litigating the contents of their contract will get them what they want. They want doses that are inside the borders of a third country. That third country also has designs on those doses the EU is not in their good books. It requires a political solution, not a legal one - but try telling the commission that, apparently.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
    For the time benig the dispute is between the EU and AstraZeneca. The UK has not said at any point that they will stop vaccine doeses from being exported from UK manufacturing sites to the EU.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- barnabee 6y ago
  If the EU contractually agreed to use the UK sites to produce vaccines for the EU on a best efforts basis but they also contractually agreed to prioritise delivery to the UK when they signed with them months earlier (which seems likely to be the case), then I'm not sure how that helps them. IANAL either, but from including similar wording in numerous contracts on the advice of lawyers, I'm reaosnably sure that committing on a best efforts basis would not require breaking your other contractual obligations.
alibarber 6y ago
I think your proposal is what will end up happening. Johnson has refused to commit to blocking exports of the vaccine. He's a long way from my preffered politician, but people who describe him as a British Trump are wrong. He is no idiot (1). He knows he's been handed a politically interesting situation and is also aware of what state the UK is in with regard to vaccine supply (one of the best in the world at this time) and what benefits some careful political manoeuvering will be able to bring in this time. Allow me some hyperbole, but the optics of 'Generous UK offers salve to unfortunate vaccine-poverty stricken EU' - whilst sickening would make for some lovely press in the right-wing tabloids and might even go a little way towards his desired 'comming together' of a divided nation. (1) Yes - Brexit was indeed idiotic but I truly believe he never actually wanted it, and it just got him his longed-for premiership by unfortunate accidental means.
- YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
  He fumbled and stumbled into premiership- but now he's going to be capable of "some careful political manoeuvering". The man who made his career as a journalist by badmouthing the EU? I find this very unlikely.
  - alibarber 6y ago
    Yes, I guess it's a bit of a push, and maybe I'm grasping at straws here. But the man is insincere in everything he does, and I'd include his badmouthing the EU in that. He'll do what he thinks is best for his vote share, and my, admittedly amateur, reading of this situation is that he might well make a trade off in that direction. Although the latest news from Northern Ireland might be rocking the boat a bit too much. We'll just have to see I guess - but these days I'll expect anything.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
      Who knows, you may be right. That would actually be the best outcome, regardless of the Comission losing face and Boris getting bragging rights.
  - 6y ago
michaelt 6y ago
> The UK will soon have a surplus of vaccines (and in fact has extra stock already by some accounts - people are being given unused doses). Eh, that's just a sign that you have to administer an entire box of vaccines after opening the box. After all, some no-shows are inevitable and it's not like they can turn away the people at the end of the queue to avoid starting a new box given the people in the queue are there by invitation.
stupidcar 6y ago
I don't think the EU is really expecting to receive a legal remedy. If they were, they wouldn't be publishing the contract or making such a public fuss. What you're seeing with this publication, with the aggressive statements by senior EU politicians, and with the imposition of border controls, is the application of political pressure, not legal pressure. I think the EU's behaviour is mostly driven by internal political reasons. Their vaccination programme has been highly inept so far, partly due to the failure of the commission. But no government admits failure when there's a possibility of assigning blame elsewhere. The more EU citizens can be convinced that it's all AZ's fault for missing deliveries, and the dastardly post-Brexit UK holding doses hostage, the less scrutiny will be be applied to their own role in creating the situation.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
ketamine__ 6y ago
> Regardless of the fact that, this contract does not, to my reading (IANAL), support their position that they have a claim over the UK-produced vaccines: pursuing a legal resolution seems silly because getting a judgement in your favour will take weeks or months. That is far too long for the timelines the EU wants. The EU probably isn't going to finish vaccination this year.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago

>> Regardless of the fact that, this contract does not, to my reading (IANAL), support their position that they have a claim over the UK-produced vaccines: (...) See my other comment here. IANAL either, but it seems this was part of the agreement. From the pdf above: 5.4 Manufacturing sites AstraZeneca shall use its Best Reasonable Efforts to manufacture the Vaccine at manufacturing sites located within the EU (which, for the purpose of this Section 5.4 only shall include the United Kingdom) (...) AstraZeneca agreed to use the UK sites to produce vaccines for the EU.

calpaterson 6y ago
It's a big step from agreeing to use UK sites as part of "Best Reasonable Efforts" to the EU having the right to recieve certain manufacture from UK sites. Anyway, as I said: it's totally irrelevant as no amount of litigating the contents of their contract will get them what they want. They want doses that are inside the borders of a third country. That third country also has designs on those doses the EU is not in their good books. It requires a political solution, not a legal one - but try telling the commission that, apparently.
- YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
  For the time benig the dispute is between the EU and AstraZeneca. The UK has not said at any point that they will stop vaccine doeses from being exported from UK manufacturing sites to the EU.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
barnabee 6y ago
If the EU contractually agreed to use the UK sites to produce vaccines for the EU on a best efforts basis but they also contractually agreed to prioritise delivery to the UK when they signed with them months earlier (which seems likely to be the case), then I'm not sure how that helps them. IANAL either, but from including similar wording in numerous contracts on the advice of lawyers, I'm reaosnably sure that committing on a best efforts basis would not require breaking your other contractual obligations.

alibarber 6y ago

I think your proposal is what will end up happening. Johnson has refused to commit to blocking exports of the vaccine. He's a long way from my preffered politician, but people who describe him as a British Trump are wrong. He is no idiot (1). He knows he's been handed a politically interesting situation and is also aware of what state the UK is in with regard to vaccine supply (one of the best in the world at this time) and what benefits some careful political manoeuvering will be able to bring in this time. Allow me some hyperbole, but the optics of 'Generous UK offers salve to unfortunate vaccine-poverty stricken EU' - whilst sickening would make for some lovely press in the right-wing tabloids and might even go a little way towards his desired 'comming together' of a divided nation. (1) Yes - Brexit was indeed idiotic but I truly believe he never actually wanted it, and it just got him his longed-for premiership by unfortunate accidental means.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
He fumbled and stumbled into premiership- but now he's going to be capable of "some careful political manoeuvering". The man who made his career as a journalist by badmouthing the EU? I find this very unlikely.
- alibarber 6y ago
  Yes, I guess it's a bit of a push, and maybe I'm grasping at straws here. But the man is insincere in everything he does, and I'd include his badmouthing the EU in that. He'll do what he thinks is best for his vote share, and my, admittedly amateur, reading of this situation is that he might well make a trade off in that direction. Although the latest news from Northern Ireland might be rocking the boat a bit too much. We'll just have to see I guess - but these days I'll expect anything.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
    Who knows, you may be right. That would actually be the best outcome, regardless of the Comission losing face and Boris getting bragging rights.
- 6y ago

michaelt 6y ago

> The UK will soon have a surplus of vaccines (and in fact has extra stock already by some accounts - people are being given unused doses). Eh, that's just a sign that you have to administer an entire box of vaccines after opening the box. After all, some no-shows are inevitable and it's not like they can turn away the people at the end of the queue to avoid starting a new box given the people in the queue are there by invitation.

stupidcar 6y ago

I don't think the EU is really expecting to receive a legal remedy. If they were, they wouldn't be publishing the contract or making such a public fuss. What you're seeing with this publication, with the aggressive statements by senior EU politicians, and with the imposition of border controls, is the application of political pressure, not legal pressure. I think the EU's behaviour is mostly driven by internal political reasons. Their vaccination programme has been highly inept so far, partly due to the failure of the commission. But no government admits failure when there's a possibility of assigning blame elsewhere. The more EU citizens can be convinced that it's all AZ's fault for missing deliveries, and the dastardly post-Brexit UK holding doses hostage, the less scrutiny will be be applied to their own role in creating the situation.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

ketamine__ 6y ago

> Regardless of the fact that, this contract does not, to my reading (IANAL), support their position that they have a claim over the UK-produced vaccines: pursuing a legal resolution seems silly because getting a judgement in your favour will take weeks or months. That is far too long for the timelines the EU wants. The EU probably isn't going to finish vaccination this year.