On 6/8/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ian Kelly wrote:
>This seems to indicate that a partnership's obligations are only
>enforceable to the extent that the partnership's members desire them
>to be enforced. Any thoughts?
Erk. I'd say we need to fix that. In real-world contract law there
is the concept of third-party rights in contracts: typically, one who
is not a party to a contract can sue to enforce the contract if e is
adversely affected by a breach in some way. I don't think we need
any restriction on this, which would be difficult to codify anyway.
Let's just get rid of that sentence.
On reflection I don't think this problem affects the personhood of
partnerships. Obligations on the partnership still become obligations on
the partners, in such a way that Agoran law recognises them as binding
obligations. The lack of an effective enforcement mechanism doesn't
change that.
All but the first paragraph is about enforcement. And as Goethe
recently pointed out, the current reading of the first paragraph is
just a truism.
-root
