Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Winspear Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gord Bolton who wrote (17247)	3/31/1999 6:00:00 PM
From: maintenance	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

This rule merely states that parties cannot insist that a clause be added after the fact. Even if it was discussed and agreed that such a clause would be included, prior to drawing up the written contract. if by some omission the clause was not in the final contract and both parties signed the contract, one cannot then insist that since it was agreed it should now be in force. I don't see any relevance here. The statute of frauds may have some bearing though. I doubt they would go that route though since the statute of frauds tend to produce more fraud than it prevents. The statute of frauds deals with the requirement of writing, particularly in matters dealing with interests in property. Cheers