6 ms·

Exactly, it has nothing to do with the contract. If I make an agreement to delivery 100 million vaccine doses tomorrow and then fail to do it, so what? Concen

by NoPie 6y ago

Exactly, it has nothing to do with the contract. If I make an agreement to delivery 100 million vaccine doses tomorrow and then fail to do it, so what? Concentrate on real issues, on what we can or cannot do, not on some lawyers' fantasies.

CogitoCogito 6y ago
Is AZ decreasing their delivery to the UK and Europe by the same percentage? edit: I find the downvotes without explanation a bit depressing. I'm replying to a post containing this: > Concentrate on real issues, on what we can or cannot do, not on some lawyers' fantasies. Decreasing UK and Euro deliveries equally is clearly something that we can do and not some legal fantasy.
- s1artibartfast 6y ago
  >Decreasing UK and Euro deliveries equally is clearly something that we can do and not some legal fantasy. It is technically feasible and contractually feasible, just not under the current agreements. The problem is that updating the agreements would be a 3 way negotiation with the UK who has all the leverage. Due to current political divide between EU and UK, the EU doesn't want to enter this negotiation, not that I think it would easy. It would probably be political suicide for the UK government to publically reduce domestic vaccine delivery unless EU offered some incredible incentives. The EU knows this and is instead paining AZ as the bad guy.
  - CogitoCogito 6y ago
    Why would this involve negotiation with the UK? They would just renege on that contract and deliver less than agreed. AZ seems to be reneging on its contract with the EU already (at least if agree with the argument that AZ can't just put their UK production outside the EU calculations).
    - s1artibartfast 6y ago
      As I understand it, AZ is not reneging on any contracts. AstraZeneca contract make its "Best Reasonable Effort" to meet EU demand, without compelling the company to stick to a specific timetable. The hangups seems to be if "Best Reasonable Effort" means includes invalidating contracts with other countries. I think this is a hard case to make. If EU manufactured vaccines are going to UK in substantial volume, I would say they are reneging by going above and beyond contractual obligations to UK, to the detriment of the EU. It makes absolute sense for EU to request this info. >at least if agree with the argument that AZ can't just put their UK production outside the EU calculations I'm not sure what you meant by calculations, but took my best guess above. Another factor is that the EU doesn't want to anger the UK by forcing AZ to break UK contract now, because in the long run, they want exports of UK production.
      - CogitoCogito 6y ago
        Well sure AZ can claim they're not reneging on contracts, but it sure seems the EU disagrees. If AZ felt reasonably sure they would lose that dispute (i.e. that it were found that they were reneging on contracts), then they might as well decide to renege equally. Regardless, AZ is making a _choice_ to interpret this as not reneging and they might very well be legally found to be in the wrong. They could just as well make the choice to admit they are reneging and do the same on other contracts out of fairness and equality (as well as political expedience). > The hangups seems to be if "Best Reasonable Effort" means includes invalidating contracts with other countries. Honestly I don't understand how it possibly couldn't. At least not unless EU negotiators screwed up the contract. Otherwise AZ could simply just over-promise and then leave the EU high and dry. I mean that's basically what the EU is arguing is happening here. Of course the contract might not have been worded that way (e.g. in the case where it was determined that AZ were meeting its obligations), but I'm sure if this came up at any time during contract negotiations, then I'm sure the EU would have said that of course other contracts can't be given precedence over theirs. Also given that the contract seemed to treat the UK production as part of the EU for this very reason, it really really seems the EU would have meant for this interpretation.
        6y ago
- wdb 6y ago
  Didn't AZ sign a contract with the EU were it can't give other clients better deals? How could AZ sign such a contract with the EU?
  - CogitoCogito 6y ago
    Is this a response to me? If anything it seems to support my argument. But I don't understand your second question. Are you asking why they would have signed such a contract? Or how such a contract obligations could be met?
thefounder 6y ago
Well, if you sign a binding agreement to deliver 100 doses of vaccine then I will use all the levers to make comply. What's wrong with this? I'm not forcing you to do more than you signed up for. The morality/politica issue is a different issue and I believe there are diplomatic channels to deal with it.

by NoPie 6y ago

CogitoCogito 6y ago

Is AZ decreasing their delivery to the UK and Europe by the same percentage? edit: I find the downvotes without explanation a bit depressing. I'm replying to a post containing this: > Concentrate on real issues, on what we can or cannot do, not on some lawyers' fantasies. Decreasing UK and Euro deliveries equally is clearly something that we can do and not some legal fantasy.

s1artibartfast 6y ago
>Decreasing UK and Euro deliveries equally is clearly something that we can do and not some legal fantasy. It is technically feasible and contractually feasible, just not under the current agreements. The problem is that updating the agreements would be a 3 way negotiation with the UK who has all the leverage. Due to current political divide between EU and UK, the EU doesn't want to enter this negotiation, not that I think it would easy. It would probably be political suicide for the UK government to publically reduce domestic vaccine delivery unless EU offered some incredible incentives. The EU knows this and is instead paining AZ as the bad guy.
- CogitoCogito 6y ago
  Why would this involve negotiation with the UK? They would just renege on that contract and deliver less than agreed. AZ seems to be reneging on its contract with the EU already (at least if agree with the argument that AZ can't just put their UK production outside the EU calculations).
  - s1artibartfast 6y ago
    As I understand it, AZ is not reneging on any contracts. AstraZeneca contract make its "Best Reasonable Effort" to meet EU demand, without compelling the company to stick to a specific timetable. The hangups seems to be if "Best Reasonable Effort" means includes invalidating contracts with other countries. I think this is a hard case to make. If EU manufactured vaccines are going to UK in substantial volume, I would say they are reneging by going above and beyond contractual obligations to UK, to the detriment of the EU. It makes absolute sense for EU to request this info. >at least if agree with the argument that AZ can't just put their UK production outside the EU calculations I'm not sure what you meant by calculations, but took my best guess above. Another factor is that the EU doesn't want to anger the UK by forcing AZ to break UK contract now, because in the long run, they want exports of UK production.
    - CogitoCogito 6y ago
      Well sure AZ can claim they're not reneging on contracts, but it sure seems the EU disagrees. If AZ felt reasonably sure they would lose that dispute (i.e. that it were found that they were reneging on contracts), then they might as well decide to renege equally. Regardless, AZ is making a _choice_ to interpret this as not reneging and they might very well be legally found to be in the wrong. They could just as well make the choice to admit they are reneging and do the same on other contracts out of fairness and equality (as well as political expedience). > The hangups seems to be if "Best Reasonable Effort" means includes invalidating contracts with other countries. Honestly I don't understand how it possibly couldn't. At least not unless EU negotiators screwed up the contract. Otherwise AZ could simply just over-promise and then leave the EU high and dry. I mean that's basically what the EU is arguing is happening here. Of course the contract might not have been worded that way (e.g. in the case where it was determined that AZ were meeting its obligations), but I'm sure if this came up at any time during contract negotiations, then I'm sure the EU would have said that of course other contracts can't be given precedence over theirs. Also given that the contract seemed to treat the UK production as part of the EU for this very reason, it really really seems the EU would have meant for this interpretation.
      - 6y ago
wdb 6y ago
Didn't AZ sign a contract with the EU were it can't give other clients better deals? How could AZ sign such a contract with the EU?
- CogitoCogito 6y ago
  Is this a response to me? If anything it seems to support my argument. But I don't understand your second question. Are you asking why they would have signed such a contract? Or how such a contract obligations could be met?

thefounder 6y ago

Well, if you sign a binding agreement to deliver 100 doses of vaccine then I will use all the levers to make comply. What's wrong with this? I'm not forcing you to do more than you signed up for. The morality/politica issue is a different issue and I believe there are diplomatic channels to deal with it.