New answers tagged legal
In the event that either party cannot fulfill their contractual obligation(s). I believe that this flows better, and follows the typical language I've seen used in other documents.
Legalese often uses defined terms to make an initially long term more succinct. The definition is offered the first time the concept is used and is usually thereafter capitalized. During the course of the calamity, the party who is incapacitated by the said event to perform the obligation (the "Incapacitated Party"), shall ... When Incapacitated ...
In legal terms, you can have a battery without assault, and an assault without battery. I'm not sure I would characterize "assault" as an attempted battery; an assault can be committed without any subjective intention to harm, as in pointing a gun at another. A battery can be committed without an assault as in the case where an individual is struck from ...
This subject generally is covered in David Mellinkoff's book, The Language of the Law. English law was written in a combination of English and French (called 'law French' as noted in the comment above) until the 17th century. If you look at the texts published by the Selden Society you will find many examples of this usage. I do not know if they are online ...
As a Brit, I find at natural here. This is the NGram for BrE corpus... But apparently, Americans are just as likely to use in. Here's the AmE NGram... Of course, there's no real concept of "right" and "wrong" here beyond what others normally say. If you're writing it yourself, and your target audience is British, you should probably go for at (but ...
In most situations at is the most common usage. But in is also correct and seems to be in wide use. So I'd say they are interchangeable, with the first being the obviously preferred choice and the second less so, but still grammatical.
Top 50 recent answers are included