I’m expecting delays with the Belgians
1 Like
Now an increasing number of European legal authorities saying WTF in legalese.
"The contract states that AstraZeneca should use its “best reasonable efforts” to manufacture initial European doses “within the EU for distribution” and deliver them following the marketing authorisation.
“On best effort, the CEO of AstraZeneca was right,” says Gustav Oertzen, a lecturer at Leuphana University in Germany.
“This is all about ‘best reasonable effort’. No clear commitments for delivery, no recognisable penalties, unless in the redacted part. No idea what von der Leyen means by ‘crystal clear commitments’ based on this contract.”
“The argument of AstraZeneca that a problem in the European manufacturing reduces the European (and not the UK) supply is more solid than I thought before,” Oertzen added.
“Maybe a case for lawyers, but together with the ‘best effort’ clauses AstraZeneca seems to have a good case."
Seen similar from an Italian law professor.
3 Likes
1 Like
From an epidemiological, hypothetical, and global, point of view, what would be the best response to this in terms of vaccination knowing the current limitations of supply? I would have thought that inoculating only those at-risk first would be the best use of current resources and those under, say, 45 or 50 would miss out. We know that the second round of vaccinations is probably going to need to come in 6-9 months as the protection presumably will begin to wear off. But I’m trying to understand whether allowing the virus to run rampant in the adult population would then create some nasty mutations that would put the adult population more at-risk.
Vaccination supply I am sure will pick up over the next couple of months but I can’t imagine we are going to have the supply we need by autumn when vaccination round 2 begins.
Wow…not even redacted properly.
1 Like
But nothing from the Belgians? 
Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae
1 Like
I saw something about a waffle clause.
But not sure if they were referring to food or the contract.
1 Like
Looking at the little picture from the article above, I suddenly thought that it was Trump coming down the escalator! Need to get him out of my head.
1 Like
This is one of the things i don’t understand. In disasters, an element of protectionism is relatively understandable. However, if the AZ director is right, the UK stipulated in their contract that their plants should only deliver to the UK and that none of it should be exported initially before the UK no longer were in great need. A clear a protectionism mechanism as I ever have seen. Understandable really, but yet, people here, including you, blame the EU for protectionism when they threaten export control after it has been shown that they get millions and millions less doses of a life saving vaccine than they had planned for ? Isn’t that immense hypocrisy ?
Because it appears so to me. I mean, in wars and catastrophes, that’s when an element of protectionism is actually understandable policy after all.
3 Likes
I think the point here is that the EU don’t seem to have dotted their i,s or crossed their t,s which allows AZ away with overcommitting on what they could deliver.
1 Like
Here it says that for the purposes of this particular contract, UK plants are included. And this is very strange since AZ boss says the UK, in a previous contact, stipulated an export ban on plants located in the UK. Seems to me then, a non-laywer who is hardly an expert in contracts, that this contract is problematic. Am I wrong ?
2 Likes
The UK isn’t stopping anyone from getting the vaccines they’ve ordered, that’s the point. The EU has threatened to restrict or withhold the export of vaccines produced within the EU that countries have legitimately ordered.
It is notable that the EU have sought the same assurances from AZ as the UK are reported to have done. They have obligated AZ to prioritise manufacture of the doses meant for the EU at EU sites (not UK sites) and have sought warranties that those doses will not be impeded by any obligations AZ had (or might subsequently have) to anyone else. That is about trying to maintain the integrity of your supply chain but there is specifically no obligation on AZ to manufacture vaccines for the EU at UK sites (although two sites in the UK are approved for this purpose under the APA), indeed the opposite is the case - they are obliged to use their best reasonable efforts to do so at sites exclusively within the EU (not UK).
2 Likes
There used to be a tv show late 80’s early 90’s that frequently used a tv clip of Willie Whitelaw saying “The Belgians” on it. I can’t remember which show it was or find the clip - would have been perfect for this thread
1 Like
better quality
2 Likes
I don’t understand entirely this take on section 5.4, as my non-laywer understanding is that in 5.4, those 2 plants in the UK are included as being in the EU. It says for the purposes of section 5.4 only, it includes those plants. So is it then legal with this double speak ? To let the UK ensure protectionism mechanisms on their plants, an initial export ban, when this contracts say that those two plants are included ? This is far outside my expertise (law paragraphs) as I don’t know but it seems to me that AZ is in clear breach.
If you have answered this already, then I will get to that. Still many posts to read.
Regardless of the details or the rights and wrongs of the EU/AZ contract, this really has turned into a twattish brexiteer ‘we told you we were better off out of the EU’ moment. The truth is, until the whole world is vaccinated, no country is truly safe regardless of the colour of your passport.
4 Likes
Well, tbf, it’s things like this which the EU are historically and systemically weak on and was cited as a benefit to leaving.
I agree that the key is to get as many people vaccinated worldwide as possible, which frankly the UK is leading the way on right now with its delivery of an affordable vaccine, its licensing of that vaccine abroad and its massive funding for the WHO COVAX program (£548m compared with €500m from the EU).
Ouch, that’s embarrassing for whoever redacted the parts that was supposed to be confidential. Ouch.
Potentially, but nothing turns on them so they can breathe a sigh of relief.