Hello Tim, I`ll address two points: goal, if a contract and what makes a “good” contract. I have always considered a contract as a letter between businessmen (or companies) who do business together. The purpose of the letter is to determine who does what and how to handle exceptions to normal procedures and procedures. However, such a letter must also contain restrictions, requirements and procedures that are generally legal in nature, and I will come back to that later. A good letter begins with a statement of intent (the scope) and then explains the responsibilities and duties of the parties. A good letter is a letter that the parties fully and unambiguously understand. For me, this means that the letter/contract must be understandable by the economic parties, not just the lawyers. It must always be remembered that anyone who must interpret a treaty after its creation may very well be someone who is not familiar with its creation – there is no legislative history to explain what one meant or why a particular term was included or omitted. That`s why a letter/good contract must be alone. I am a win-win, which is why I also think that a good treaty has the right balance of risk between the parties and therefore a fair balance of rewards. The outcome of the business relationship between the parties (and there is always a relationship in a single agreement) depends on the fact that there is a good chance that both parties will achieve their goals. Both parties should share success – that`s the motivation to make the relationship work. Restrictions, requirements and legal procedures are required to write a clear business letter in a contract.

In general, you want to talk about what happens when things go wrong. This part is hard. If you consider all the things that could go wrong and expose the consequences and actions, you conclude with a contract the size of a Microsoft operating system. The trick is to decide what should be described and treated realistically and what generalizations you will make to cover unforeseen or unexpected events. Unfortunately, the latter adds a degree of ambiguity, resulting in a bunch of subjective words such as “reasonable” and “if any.” This cannot be realistically avoided, but should be kept to a minimum. I hope you will find this view as eloquent as it is simple. And an Italian member said: “It`s really difficult, and it`s even because of the way we measure the success of a negotiation. I have been thinking about what could be an objective criterion of good quality, even though I have not been able to find a criterion that is applicable worldwide.

Let`s consider the number. B of litigation once a contract has been signed.