Sounds reasonable but AZ may have left themselves exposed a bit on their contract with the EU which states that any contracts or agreements entered into with third parties ( i.e. the UK) does not relieve them (AZ) of their 'best endeavours' obligation ( which includes sourcing from UK plants) to meet the EU 's 300m order.According to a lawyer in the relevant field on the radio, this comes down to the fact the British Government gambled and got production facilities up and running while the EU messed about , if the UK government had not gambled then we’d be in the same position as the EU , so the lawyer suggested they had no claim over the supply in the UK by the fact that this stock would not have existed but for the actions of the UK government. He suggested the question in a courtroom towards the EU is why they did not get production facilities up and running and the fact they knew about the orders the UK government had placed but still delayed.
I hadn’t seen that, just that they believe they’re entitled to some from the U.K. site. If they think their contract overrules another one then that’s ridiculous. I get the fairness argument to an extent but it’s meaningless.
Looks like a legal minefield, which through my experience seems to be the norm where manufacturing contracts end in disputes.Sounds reasonable but AZ may have left themselves exposed a bit on their contract with the EU which states that any contracts or agreements entered into with third parties ( i.e. the UK) does not relieve them (AZ) of their 'best endeavours' obligation ( which includes sourcing from UK plants) to meet the EU 's 300m order.
And AZ said they would "best endevour" to make that order as they couldn't guarantee it. there were no guarantees in the contract.This stock might not have existed but for the EU's order for and payment for 300m doses upfront.
The government is getting what they paid for. The EU isn't.
But the UK government has not shut up about its getting all these vaccines.
they are demanding that AZ supply from the UK plant but that the breaks our contract. Media headlnes are more along the lines of EU demands UK supply the vaccine.
they are seemingly now blocking exports of vaccines to us.
Given Germany have secured their own supply of Pfizer vaccine are they going to share that?What is the end game for the EU here? Do they want AZ to break their contract with the UK to provide vaccine to the EU instead?
Thats not going to happen unleess the UK plays balls, regardless of how much the EU throws its toys out of the pram. Are the EU going to take legal action on a company who is providing the vaccine at cost? Thats not really going to look well. The EU can whinge all it wants, its cards do not look too good from here.
What is the end game for the EU here? Do they want AZ to break their contract with the UK to provide vaccine to the EU instead?
Thats not going to happen unleess the UK plays balls, regardless of how much the EU throws its toys out of the pram. Are the EU going to take legal action on a company who is providing the vaccine at cost? Thats not really going to look well. The EU can whinge all it wants, its cards do not look too good from here.
We've not seen the UK contract. The priority might have been for the first 100 doses. Even if it were more, AZ has still warranted that no other contract would prevent the EU getting its share.
The EU constantly threatening a vaccine manufacturer who are dishing it out at cost as a humanitarian effort and sticking up a border in NI were not what I was expecting from Jan 2021
Apologies quoted you by mistake mate.Yep which would back up the EU saying that would be a breach of contract.
No we haven’t (as of yet). However “AstraZeneca will work to make up to 30 million doses available by September for people in the UK” it is implied that will be the first 30m doses produced based on anticipated outputs etc.
That this was in the public domain significantly weakens a EU position of “only AZ knew” if any other agreements would prevent AZ fulfilling its contract with the EU. It simply does not stand up to scrutiny.
No it doesn’t, they’re not saying only AZ knew. It’s more it doesn’t matter whether AZ have other contracts that have priorities attached - they specifically state they won’t impede on their ability to fulfil their obligations. That the U.K. had ordered those doses is probably what led to that clause being put in in the first place.
they are demanding that AZ supply from the UK plant but that the breaks our contract. Media headlnes are more along the lines of EU demands UK supply the vaccine.
they are seemingly now blocking exports of vaccines to us.
Ok. So let’s break this particular point down.
Do you think AZ knowingly lied when they signed the contract with the EU?
Ok. So let’s break this particular point down.
Do you think AZ knowingly lied when they signed the contract with the EU?
I suspect AZ thought they could fulfill both contracts without any issues, or at least no major ones.
Perhaps gambled rather than ‘thought’.