zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. reaper+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-05-23 04:39:54
At most it would just make that part of the contract void. Almost all contracts with stuff like this would have a “severability” clause which states like if one part of the contract is invalid, the rest is still valid.

But even without that, judges have huge amounts of leeway to “create” an ex post facto contract and say “heres the version if that contract you would have agreed to, this is now the contract you signed”. A sort of “fixed” version of the contract.

replies(1): >>dragon+b
2. dragon+b[view] [source] 2024-05-23 04:42:11
>>reaper+(OP)
> At most it would just make that part of the contract void. Almost all contracts with stuff like this would have a “severability” clause which states like if one part of the contract is invalid, the rest is still valid.

Severability clauses themselves are not necessarily valid; whether provisions can be severed and how without voiding the contract is itself a legal question that depends on the specific terms and circumstances.

[go to top]