[EURO-Discuss] transparency on changes of rules
roessler at does-not-exist.org
Tue May 8 18:46:26 EDT 2007
On 2007-05-08 23:36:29 +0100, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
>> On the one hand, there still isn't a clear indication what the
>> status of the MoU really is -- is it binding, on whom, and so
>> on. That would have been a set of questions that should have
>> been resolved before the MoU was formally signed.
> I'm afraid the above isn't a correct statement. The MoU is binding
> upon those who signed it. It is not binding upon those who have not.
In that case, I'm awaiting your explanation what the word "binding"
means when it comes to an agreement that is "not intended as a
contract for enforcement".
(Your words, 28 March, archived at .)
Thomas Roessler <roessler at does-not-exist.org>
More information about the EURO-Discuss