5 ms·

I'm not a lawyer. But if reallocating UK doses to the EU, would Astra Zeneca then be in a predicament of not fulfilling their contract to the UK? I have no ide

I'm not a lawyer. But if reallocating UK doses to the EU, would Astra Zeneca then be in a predicament of not fulfilling their contract to the UK? I have no idea, but presumably this would depend on knowing the UK contract. So from my perspective, it's tough to know what Astra Zeneca ought to be doing without knowing all of their contractual obligations. That sounds tough. So I'm glad that I'm not a lawyer.

ChrisKnott 6y ago
Yes, the UK contract has an explicit clause that says doses manufactured from the UK plants can only be exported once the UK order is fulfilled. The UK government demanded this as a condition of partnering with Oxford, and vetoed Oxford partnering with Merck because they wanted a UK HQed company. Whether AZ is breaching the contract with the EU seems to be debatable, but the EU are certainly expecting AZ to explicitly break their contract with the UK.
rvieira 6y ago
(I'm also not a lawyer) Does it matter? From my perspective, that contractual problem is between AZ and the UK, not between the EU and the UK. If I buy 100 doses from AZ and you buy 100 doses, and AZ only has 125, one of the contracts will have to breached.
- breakfastduck 6y ago
  No, that's wrong. The contractual dispute is between AZ and the EU. The UK and AZ already had an agreement in place, with the UK taking main place manufacturing the product. AZ signed a contract with EU way afterwards. That is the one which would be breached, and the center of the dispute.
  - toyg 6y ago
    Unless it's acknowledged in the contract, order of signature has little or no relevance from a legal perspective.
    - breakfastduck 6y ago
      It does when one of the contracts is the actual vaccine manufacturer
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]