What Does Remain Silent Mean in a Contract

The right to remain silent is protected by common law. [31] The “Rules and Instructions for the Interrogation of Suspects and the Recording of Statements” (Rules and Instructions), issued in 1992 by the then Minister of Security, state that caution should be exercised in reminding a suspect of his or her right to remain silent when questioned. The statement can be read in English and Cantonese:[32] . and to the extent that a procurement contract is silent on the conditions necessary for compliance, those clauses are incorporated by reference into the procurement agreement. While tacit agreements can serve as a basis for further negotiations, they are also vulnerable to attack if the explicit terms of the agreement are not codified during negotiations. According to Jessica Wing-kay Chiu (趙穎琦), then a PhD student at the University of Hong Kong, the law does not codify the exact procedure for serving a notice of the right to silence. [34] In general, every person is required to appear in court and testify, unless the law provides otherwise (§ 108). There are some notable exceptions: § 119: The court cannot hear statements from a priest of the Norwegian Church or a priest or similar in a registered faith, lawyers, defense lawyers, arbitrators in matrimonial matters. doctors, psychologists, nurses, midwives or pharmacists, unless expressly authorized by the person entitled to secrecy, about everything they have learned in the performance of their duties.

This does not apply if the testimony of a witness is necessary to prevent a person from being wrongfully convicted (Article 119). Catholic priests have also refused to testify in these cases about information obtained in confession, and the Supreme Court has not allowed it. § 121: Even if the relationship is not governed by Article 119, the courts may exempt a witness from the obligation to testify in order to obtain information obtained in the context of counselling, social work, medical care, legal assistance or similar. Article 122: The spouse, the parents in direct ascending or descending order, the brothers and sisters and their spouses are not required to testify. The same is true for separated or divorced spouses or persons living in a “marriage-like” relationship, such as common law marriages. The court may extend this right to fiancées, foster parents, children or siblings. Article 123: A witness may refuse to answer questions that lead to self-incrimination, either for himself or for a person related to the witness within the meaning of article 122. Article 124: A witness may refuse to answer questions concerning trade secrets. The court may, after examination, compel the witness to testify. Article 125: The editor-in-chief of a periodical/printed newspaper may refuse to disclose the author of articles in his journal or the sources of their contents. This means that you have nothing to say, answer a question or make a statement unless you want to. The inclusion of clear provisions on applicable law and jurisdiction in a contract, as mentioned above, should ultimately help to ensure that all disputes are resolved in accordance with the law and courts chosen by the parties.

Here is an example of how these provisions work. Suppose a California company enters into a contract with a New York company and the contract states that California law governs the agreement (choice of law) and that each party must hear all disputes in a specific California court (jurisdiction and location). If a dispute arises, the Californian company can file a lawsuit in California and force the New York company to seek a local attorney in California. Moreover, New York society may not be as familiar with California law as New York law. Without understanding the applicable differences, the New York-based company may learn that California law resolves the dispute unexpectedly. If the New York-based company wants to take legal action against the California seller, it must do so in a court thousands of miles from its home state. Such restrictions clearly disadvantage the New York-based company and may ultimately deter the company from asserting its rights. Fully drafted commercial contracts usually specify the applicable law and the place where disputes will be heard.

First of all, if this is the best way to express the desired meaning. Instead, I would say something along these lines: this Agreement does not deal with the law governing disputes arising out of this Agreement or the subject matter of this Agreement. Finally, if the silent party acts on the agreement, silence is considered acceptance. In the case of unsolicited goods, the potential buyer, if using the goods, has accepted the contract. Suppose A sends food to B and A informs B that A is waiting for payment. If B eats the food, then B has accepted the agreement. The general rule is that silence is not acceptance. See McGlone v. Lacey, 288 F.Supp 662 (D.S.D. 1968). However, there are four main exceptions to this general rule. In countries that were once part of the British Empire (such as the Commonwealth countries, the United States and the Republic of Ireland), the right to remain silent has remained rooted in the common law tradition inherited from England, although it no longer applies in England and Wales, where jury silence can be considered a sign of guilt.

NB Scots law, which is not derived from English law but is completely separate, still retains the full right to remain silent. In the United States, the law existed before the American Revolution. However, it was considered one of the most important safeguards protecting citizens from state arbitrariness and was enshrined in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, with the words “due process”, first mentioned in a Statute of Edward III of 1354, which contains wording similar to that of the Fifth Amendment. (1) It must be reasonable and fair; (2) It must be necessary to give effect to the contract in such a way that no term is implied if the contract is effective without it; 3) It must be so obvious that “it goes without saying”; (4) It must be possible to express it clearly; (5) It may not contradict any express contractual provision. A recent example Pernod appointed Lion as distributor of certain wine brands as of November 1, 2010. The distribution agreement lasted only until the sale of these brands to Lion was completed on December 22, 2010. At the same time, Pernod sold wine production equipment to Indevin, which delivered bulk wine to Lion after colonization. The case highlights the importance of obtaining legal advice from lawyers in the jurisdiction where the foreign company is registered, which not only confirms the validity of the performance method used by the foreign company under applicable local law, but also whether the signatories: bind the foreign company in accordance with the laws of the jurisdiction, in which it is saved.