On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I call for judgment on the following statement: "The devolution of the > AFO's obligations onto comex means that the AFO is in breach of the > AAA agreement if comex calls CFJs for the clear purpose of allowing > the CFJ to harvest their ID numbers." > > --Wooble
Rule 1742 says: "Parties to a contract SHALL act in accordance with that contract." There is no language to the effect that non-parties to a contract shall act in accordance with a contract. Therefore, although the AFO's R1742 obligation that the AFO act in accordance with the AAA contract devolves onto me, the AFO has no obligation that *I* act in accordance with the AAA contract. The situation presents an inequity, but I can and will refuse to agree to any equity judgements regarding the situation. Which means, by the way, that thanks to "Take it to Equity!", people can now violate contracts willy-nilly and refuse to agree to the equity judgements; they would not be parties to the equations, so any R1742 CFJs alleging breach of the equation would be invalid. Thanks for the CFJ, by the way ;)
