============================== CFJ 2715 ==============================
I am party to the Livenomic Partnership contract.
Called by omd: 06 Oct 2009 20:12:26 GMT
Assigned to Murphy: 14 Oct 2009 22:41:15 GMT
Judged FALSE by Murphy: 25 Oct 2009 17:15:47 GMT
On Oct 6, 2009, at 4:06 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:55 PM, comex wrote:
>> I hereby invoke my R101 (iv) right to leave this contract, as it was
>> amended without my first having the reasonable opportunity to review
>> the amendment.
> Does the right not to be bound by the amendment grant a right not to
> be bound by the rest of the contract?
Judge Murphy's Arguments:
In the absence of arguments or evidence to the contrary, I accept c.'s
claim that e did not have a reasonable opportunity to review the
By R101(iv), c. has the right to not be considered bound by the relevant
amendment, or by the post-amendment form of the agreement. E may or may
not have remained bound by the pre-amendment form of the agreement, but
that doesn't matter here; the statement in this case mentions "the
Livenomic Partnership contract", which refers to the agreement in its
Judge Murphy's Evidence:
> As allowed by Livenomic's Rule 2 (and thus by the LNP agreement), I
> amend the LNP agreement by adding the following at the end:
> Wooble CAN act on behalf of comex to perform any action.
> Walker CAN terminate this contract by announcement.
Relevant excerpt from Rule 101:
iv. Every person has the right to not be considered bound by
an agreement, or an amendment to an agreement, or a Rule
Change, which e has not had the reasonable opportunity to