Is embedding documents within a Contract an acceptable practice ?

D

DG Doc Control

Morning everybody,

Does anyone have an opinion on embedding documents into a contract?

We currently have a consultant working with us and he says it is bad practice to embed documents into a contract but cannot explain to me why? Any thoughts?
 

Wes Bucey

Prophet of Profit
Morning everybody,

Does anyone have an opinion on embedding documents into a contract?

We currently have a consultant working with us and he says it is bad practice to embed documents into a contract but cannot explain to me why? Any thoughts?
How is embedding different from attaching addenda or exhibits? I guess I'm going to have to see a better explanation than your consultant's weak statement which I interpret as essentially a variation of "Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges! I don't have to show you any stinkin' badges!"
 

somashekar

Leader
Admin
Morning everybody,

Does anyone have an opinion on embedding documents into a contract?

We currently have a consultant working with us and he says it is bad practice to embed documents into a contract but cannot explain to me why? Any thoughts?
As far as possible and practicable, try to have the single start to finish contract document. The reason being that in any form of communication / transmission to any recepient of the contract document, he gets the single complete contract. There are chances that the recepient's h/w and, or s/w is not capable to open the embedded document OR that his additional action to open the embedded document and read it in conjunction with the main contract document may perhaps get missed.
It helps to keep in simple, clear and safe.
 

Wes Bucey

Prophet of Profit
As far as possible and practicable, try to have the single start to finish contract document. The reason being that in any form of communication / transmission to any recepient of the contract document, he gets the single complete contract. There are chances that the recepient's h/w and, or s/w is not capable to open the embedded document OR that his additional action to open the embedded document and read it in conjunction with the main contract document may perhaps get missed.
It helps to keep in simple, clear and safe.
that's still a weak argument. If the second party to a contract can't read it, he won't sign it. Works the same as if the document were in a language foreign to the second party - if he's not satisfied with the accuracy of a translation, he won't agree.
 
A

amit_rd

This is an interesting discussion!

As long as the contract document clearly specifies the number of embedded documents and their scope and contract version information is in line with that of the embedded documents, I do not see a problem.

Thanks
 

somashekar

Leader
Admin
that's still a weak argument. If the second party to a contract can't read it, he won't sign it. Works the same as if the document were in a language foreign to the second party - if he's not satisfied with the accuracy of a translation, he won't agree.
It is weak to understand that contracts are meant to be read and signed and no more. Contracts are referred to several times by several personnel during the course of the execution. There is no harm having something embedded since there is technology to do it. The question is about practice. I would support that consultant with as far as possible and practicable ~~~ rest in post #4... :agree:
 

Jim Wynne

Leader
Admin
As far as possible and practicable, try to have the single start to finish contract document. The reason being that in any form of communication / transmission to any recepient of the contract document, he gets the single complete contract. There are chances that the recepient's h/w and, or s/w is not capable to open the embedded document OR that his additional action to open the embedded document and read it in conjunction with the main contract document may perhaps get missed.
It helps to keep in simple, clear and safe.

It's not unusual for purchase orders and other types of contracts to make reference to documents that aren't even attached in any way. The fact that there are embedded documents puts the onus on both parties to control the attachments and make them accessible as necessary to whomever might need to see them.
 

Wes Bucey

Prophet of Profit
It is weak to understand that contracts are meant to be read and signed and no more. Contracts are referred to several times by several personnel during the course of the execution. There is no harm having something embedded since there is technology to do it. The question is about practice. I would support that consultant with as far as possible and practicable ~~~ rest in post #4... :agree:
Once the document is accepted by both parties, it is up to EACH party to make those "parts" of it which are pertinent to a specific job function available to the necessary personnel. To give an idea of parts which are NOT distributed to ALL personnel, think first of price - which is rarely disclosed to all personnel in an organization.
 

Michael_M

Trusted Information Resource
We get P.O. that state something like: Per quality clause 1.1, 1.3, 1.6, 2.4, and 2.8 and per purchasing clause P1, P5, and P9.

This is normal for us.
 
Top Bottom