EU unhappy with astrazeneca

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

eu officials "think" the money went into the UK facility, that is not fact, so far the eu havnt been able to turn up any evidence which is why they are quickly back tracking, helped slightly with a promise of 9 million extra doses which still leaves the EU 50% short on what it hoped for, so although 9 million extra is a lot, its actually a very minor token gesture in the grand scheme of things.

in fact according to this report https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-eu-astrazeneca-idUSL1N2K30UO the extra doses were offered at the start of last week, but the EU wouldn't accept them, though magically by friday evening everything was hunky dory and the EU had a "WIN". though they didnt, they are just attempting to hide their incompetence at handling this matter.

So, you've not provided any evidence other than a report stating what the EU believe to be true in an argument between the EU and AZ when all sorts of poorly based statements have been made by the EU. Yet you're accusing me of refusing to accept your invalid evidence and can't provide anything to back your claims. Other than the UK factories being included in the contract

And you want me to provide evidence of something not happening. That's a bit tricky as it didn't happen.

Your repeated stating that its accepted evidence is because you've backed yourself into a corner that that you can't dig yourself out of and you're making yourself look silly.....

If you refuse to accept the evidence that I provide, and dismiss it out-of-hand, and without providing evidence to the contrary, then you're just shutting your eyes tight and refusing to accept the obvious.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Hands up who's read the contract?

Oh that will be me then..

Here it is. So people can read it and avoid relying on the press.



If you read sec 6.2 its clear who is in breach.

If that refers to the "best efforts", we've already established, supported by other erstwhile evidence that the "best efforts" refers to providing the manufacturing plants within EU. It does not refer to delivery dates, nor amounts.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

i couldnt provide any further proof than copy segments of the contract.

Why don't you try doing that, instead of saying it says this and that in the contract.
If we're still also talking about what the phrase "best efforts" refers to, I have already provided evidence from a legal expert, quoted on a Reuters web site that the phrase "best efforts" refers to producing the vaccines within EU.
If you haven't seen it, then i suggest you trawl through all the posts because I'm fed up of repeating myself ad nauseum every time someone else pipes up with, 'where's the evidence'.
It's been posted numerous times, and no amount of you denying it will make it true.

 

[Dangee]

Isn’t it your bedtime soon Bobby Jim?

 

[sxturbo]

bobby hasnt actually read the contract, i dont think he understands how business works, or contract law, just continues to spout nonsense created by his imagination, based on various snippets he has "heard" or seen, in one post he claimed to have been told by members of the commission.

he has been called out by a number of forum members but still insists it is everyone who is wrong, even the forum arch europhiles (noseall, notch, johnd, ellal etc) haven't even come to his defence because he has no case.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

bobby hasnt actually read the contract, i dont think he understands how business works, or contract law, just continues to spout nonsense created by his imagination, based on various snippets he has "heard" or seen, in one post he claimed to have been told by members of the commission.

Now you're spouting absolute nonsense.

he has been called out by a number of forum members but still insists it is everyone who is wrong, even the forum arch europhiles (noseall, notch, johnd, ellal etc) haven't even come to his defence because he has no case.

Every time I post the evidence, you and others dismiss it out-of-hand without providing evidence to the contrary.
Until you can provide evidence to refute the evidence I provide, my evidence stands.

Instead of talking silly nonsense post up the part of the contract that you claim refutes my evidence.

 

[motorbiking]

If that refers to the "best efforts", we've already established, supported by other erstwhile evidence that the "best efforts" refers to providing the manufacturing plants within EU. It does not refer to delivery dates, nor amounts.

The contract makes no mention of the term best efforts. Best Reasonable Efforts (entirely different legal meaning) is defined in section 1.9 and requires them to do what a similar company would do in the situation. Section 6.2 defines how a superseding contract is to be handled and clarifies that AZ would not be in breach if another contract trumped this contract. Including another contract signed after this contract.

Its in there if you read it. I'm kinda also concluding that you didn't.

 

[sxturbo]

Why don't you try doing that, instead of saying it says this and that in the contract.
If we're still also talking about what the phrase "best efforts" refers to, I have already provided evidence from a legal expert, quoted on a Reuters web site that the phrase "best efforts" refers to producing the vaccines within EU.
If you haven't seen it, then i suggest you trawl through all the posts because I'm fed up of repeating myself ad nauseum every time someone else pipes up with, 'where's the evidence'.
It's been posted numerous times, and no amount of you denying it will make it true.

i did copy and paste parts of the contract, numerous times, i even used the snippet tool, however you deluded self insisted they were not from the contract.

you posted 1 article where the EU said in there mind that's what they meant, whereas there is other outlets saying otherwise,

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/it-s-hard-to-see-how-the-eu-can-win-a-case-against-astrazeneca

 

[sxturbo]

Now you're spouting absolute nonsense.


Every time I post the evidence, you and others dismiss it out-of-hand without providing evidence to the contrary.
Until you can provide evidence to refute the evidence I provide, my evidence stands.

Instead of talking silly nonsense post up the part of the contract that you claim refutes my evidence.

you havnt posted any evidence, everything you have posted is just re-writes of what everyone has seen and read, however your delusion thinks it helps show you are correct.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

The contract makes no mention of the term best efforts. Best Reasonable Efforts (entirely different legal meaning) is defined in section 1.9 and requires them to do what a similar company would do in the situation. Section 6.2 defines how a superseding contract is to be handled and clarifies that AZ would not be in breach if another contract trumped this contract. Including another contract signed after this contract.

Its in there if you read it. I'm kinda also concluding that you didn't.

Irrespective of the actual wording, (which to a non-legal person is about the same), it refers to manufacturing within EU, not amounts, nor to delivery dates.

 

[motorbiking]

Nope - read section 5.1 and 5.4 and no the two terms have different meaning.

 

[Dangee]

Motor, you can’t argue with a deluded person.
If you say the sky is blue, he’ll disagree & provide some little read article in the “South China Post” saying so.
Just humour him.

 

[fillyboy]

Nope - read section 5.1 and 5.4 and no the two terms have different meaning.

The contract doesn't need rewriting, clause 5.1 is all the protection UK/AstraZeneca need. A lot of people are not fully understanding section 5.4 which refers solely to which countries AZ is 'allowed' to manufacturer in without the permission of the EU, which is why they include the UK in the EU solely for article 5.4
The contract is cast iron, Ursula can **** right off.



Read more: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/eu-unhappy-with-astrazeneca.562653/page-16#ixzz6lL4MdBY2

 

[fillyboy]

Motor, you can’t argue with a deluded person.
If you say the sky is blue, he’ll disagree & provide some little read article in the “South China Post” saying so.
Just humour him.

You took 'it' off ignore didn't you? don't come running to me when you get an ulcer.

 

[Dangee]

Bobby disappears around now anyway. He’s not on uk time.