[committee] Fwd: Fw: MOU for UCC

[Jacques Chester]

Daniel;

I'm not a lawyer either, but the general rule of thumb is that you
can't use contractual terms to evade the clear meaning of an Act
of Parliament. Both the MOU and your own phrasing would probably
fail in this event.

Furthermore, the MOU is not a contract in my reading. It couldn't
bind on the future committee and there's no enforcement mechanism
save for being expelled in the guild. In the case that the UCC
was winding up I doubt this would seem like a very grave threat.

Without looking into the details of the guild arrangements, it is
also possible that the affiliation relationship with the guild
does not, of itself, constitute a contract. And even if it does, it
may not be possible to protect the guild from a future argument that
the UCC may be affiliated *only* according the the UWA Act and by-laws,
and that to add requirements to those by-laws through contract would
be ultra vires. The semi-public nature of the Guild makes this a very
murky area. Quite frankly I found administrative law to be incredibly
tedious and I believe I failed it quite heroically.

So to sum up:

1. The MOU is probably not a contract and can't bind the UCC;
2. Any contract based on using affiliation as consideration might
   fail as the UCC may, under existing by-laws, be entitled to it
   according to a process and not an exchangeable right;
3. If the Guild tried to make the MOU a condition of affiliation it
   might be acting ultra vires; and
4. A judge could easily ignore points 1-3 and rule that the Act
   overrides all this jiggery-pokery.

My advice to the committee is to talk to some MPs about amending one
or both of the conflicting Acts. I'm pretty sure they won't bite.
Minor procedural amendments like these go through on the nod quite
frequently.

Cheers,

JC.