EU unhappy with astrazeneca

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

I agree....your post #188 makes sense, neither party would really want the whole contract available in the public domain.

If it comes to legal dispute, then the whole contract will be available to the court.

Large sections of the contract, published with the agreement of AstraZeneca, have been blanked out - redacted - to protect sensitive information.

These include some paragraphs dealing with costs, guaranteed delivery dates and intellectual property.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55852698​

 

[fillyboy]

Yet france blocked a shipment of PPE to the UK, later released. Both Austria and Switzerland had to make diplomatic complaints about Germany refusing to release shipments of PPE. All within your beloved EU.

Fortunately we had the Boris, a threat to send in the gunboats sorted those Frenchies out pretty damn quick.

 

[sxturbo]

You're welcome to your opinion, but you have no evidence to suport your assertion. It's pure specualtion on your part.
Who wanted to publish the contract, and who did not?
Who published the contract, and who did not?

Large sections of the contract, published with the agreement of AstraZeneca, have been blanked out - redacted - to protect sensitive information.
These include some paragraphs dealing with costs, guaranteed delivery dates and intellectual property.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55852698​

They couldn't garuntee delivery dates which is why best efforts was termed in the contract

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Fortunately we had the Boris, a threat to send in the gunboats sorted those Frenchies out pretty damn quick.

Are you applying for transam's village idiot role?

 

[EddieM]

Further all this deflection and sabre rattling really isn't going to help with negotiations to purchase the Novavax vaccine, for which the UK signed contracts for in August, but the EU hasn't concluded a contract for yet.

Sorry, I'm whilst I'll freely admit to being fairly ambivalent about the EU, they really should be hanging their heads in shame over this and yes, I accept there are things the UK should hang their heads in shame for

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

They couldn't garuntee delivery dates which is why best efforts was termed in the contract

Then there wouldn't be any guaranteed delivery dates mentioned. There were, but they were redacted.
Additionally, if UK sites were included in the best efforts clause (which it was), and there was no mention of priority to any customers (there wasn't) then the EU has a sound case for AZ to include the UK sites in the distribution of the vaccine.

 

[Brigadier]

The EU wanted it published, why would they have requested an NDA?

NDA fairly standard contractual element.
It might be that the contract is a cut-and-paste job, perhaps of something for supply of flu vaccines, animal antibiotics, weedkiller...........
....and, like many things, only found to be wanting when scrutinised after the shoite starts hitting the fan.
That the EU subsequently wanted the contract published was probably something neither party thought would be required, so any NDA would almost be a moot anyway.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

NDA fairly standard contractual element.
It might be that the contract is a cut-and-paste job, perhaps of something for supply of flu vaccines, animal antibiotics, weedkiller...........
....and, like many things, only found to be wanting when scrutinised after the shoite starts hitting the fan.
That the EU subsequently wanted the contract published was probably something neither party thought would be required, so any NDA would almost be a moot anyway.

It still illustrates that the EU wanted the contract to be published to support its case, but it could not do so due to a NDA.

Also further analysis of the contract indicates that "best endeavours" was only applicable until the vaccine was developed. Once the vaccine was developed, then the "best endeavours" clause is no longer admissable.

Mrs von der Leyen said in Friday morning's radio interview.
"'Best effort' was valid while it was still unclear whether they could develop a vaccine. That time is behind us. The vaccine is there.
"AstraZeneca has also explicitly assured us in this contract that no other obligations would prevent the contract from being fulfilled," she said.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55852698​

It looks like the EU's case might be much stronger than at first thought.

​

 

[fillyboy]

Yet france blocked a shipment of PPE to the UK, later released. Both Austria and Switzerland had to make diplomatic complaints about Germany refusing to release shipments of PPE. All within your beloved EU.

Fortunately we had the Boris, a threat to send in the gunboats sorted those Frenchies out pretty damn quick.

 

[EddieM]

It still illustrates that the EU wanted the contract to be published to support its case, but it could not do so due to a NDA.

Also further analysis of the contract indicates that "best endeavours" was only applicable until the vaccine was developed. Once the vaccine was developed, then the "best endeavours" clause is no longer admissable.

Mrs von der Leyen said in Friday morning's radio interview.
"'Best effort' was valid while it was still unclear whether they could develop a vaccine. That time is behind us. The vaccine is there.
"AstraZeneca has also explicitly assured us in this contract that no other obligations would prevent the contract from being fulfilled," she said.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55852698​

It looks like the EU's case might be much stronger than at first thought.

​

Unless she is chatting s**t.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Unless she is chatting s**t.

Or she knows what she is talking about, and the suspicion that the UK is preventing export of vaccines is correct:

EU officials say AstraZeneca has been asked to send some doses manufactured in the UK to the continent to make up the shortfall, but the company said on Wednesday that its contract for UK supplies prevented this.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55852698​

This would suggest that
a) UK's contract had a clause to restrict export of UK produced vaccines, and AZ intentionally negotiated a contract with EU, on terms that it could not meet.
b) UK has renegotiated its contract to restrict the export of UK produced vaccine,
c) AZ intentionally negotiated a contract with EU, on terms that it could not meet.
d) AZ is not being honest. Why?
Which is the most likely?

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Fortunately we had the Boris, a threat to send in the gunboats sorted those Frenchies out pretty damn quick.

Are you applying for transam's village idiot role?

Or is it that your memory is failing, and you forgot that you already posted that comment?

 

[Trazor]

Or she knows what she is talking about, and the suspicion that the UK is preventing export of vaccines is correct:

EU officials say AstraZeneca has been asked to send some doses manufactured in the UK to the continent to make up the shortfall, but the company said on Wednesday that its contract for UK supplies prevented this.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55852698​

This would suggest that
a) UK's contract had a clause to restrict export of UK produced vaccines, and AZ intentionally negotiated a contract with EU, on terms that it could not meet.
b) UK has renegotiated its contract to restrict the export of UK produced vaccine,
c) AZ intentionally negotiated a contract with EU, on terms that it could not meet.
d) AZ is not being honest. Why?
Which is the most likely?

Or e) the UK has a binding contract, and the EU does not.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Or e) the UK has a binding contract, and the EU does not.

I don't think either party would be arguing over a non-binding contract.

 

[Trazor]

I don't think either party would be arguing over a non-binding contract.

Well AstraZenica are implying that the EU contract is not binding on delivery quantities, thus the arguments start.