The EU v UK vaccine tussle
Discussion
FiF said:
As written earlier, rather than Bozzer to offer forego the Pfizer deliveries, I'd rather take the high ground and support the EU with part of the UK AZ production providing we a) have enough stock to give all the second doses and b) get enough supplies from AZ and Novamax going forward to maintain a reasonable programme going forward and offer a jab to all adults before end September.
My point is wouldn't proactively foregoing the Pfizer jabs bring the significant risk that there would be some citizens put into uncharted territory regarding anywhere from not getting the second jab against their will, getting it but not in the correct time frame, having a mixed vaccination, 1Pf + 1 AZ or whatever. Sharp suited lawyers would be rubbing their hands. If the EU stop exports that's force majeure surely and puts it in different legal responsibility. But IANAL, so just my 2p.
Unfortunately I can't see the avoidance of politicking and attempts to show other parties in a bad light. Though tbh I don't care about the EU being shown in a bad light, it's only deserved. I feel sorry for their citizens, the Commission etc, not so much.
Yep, the one thing that was stated from the get-go and that being that having being given one vaccine (either PF or AZ) on your first appt the second dose would be from the same supplier as the first.My point is wouldn't proactively foregoing the Pfizer jabs bring the significant risk that there would be some citizens put into uncharted territory regarding anywhere from not getting the second jab against their will, getting it but not in the correct time frame, having a mixed vaccination, 1Pf + 1 AZ or whatever. Sharp suited lawyers would be rubbing their hands. If the EU stop exports that's force majeure surely and puts it in different legal responsibility. But IANAL, so just my 2p.
Unfortunately I can't see the avoidance of politicking and attempts to show other parties in a bad light. Though tbh I don't care about the EU being shown in a bad light, it's only deserved. I feel sorry for their citizens, the Commission etc, not so much.
There is zero data on mixing two separate vaccines from a different supplier, which is hardly surprising!
So now people are left with a choice, which is in fact one given the supply of the Pzifer vaccine is now in serious doubt, and any second dose of the Pfizer jab couldn't possibly be guaranteed.
Leithen said:
We've lucked in and done something right - "It's not our problem, but we'll happily consider helping if we can"
Much as I have been very critical of many aspects of the pandemic response in the UK there was little luck involved when it came to the vaccines. They just approached the likely firms who could produce the vaccine and tried to make sure the UK would get enough as soon as possible. This also extended to making sure the Oxford vaccine was produced here in the UK (no doubt in case anyone tried something like this). The initial partner for the Oxford university was Merk until it was changed to AZ at the suggestion of the UK government. Edited by JagLover on Friday 29th January 13:21
Oh dear.
18.4. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of Belgium.
18.5. Resolution.
(a) In the event of a dispute arising under this Agreement between the Parties, the
Parties shall first refer such dispute to informal dispute resolution discussions
between their respective Executive Officers. AstraZeneca, on the one hand, or the
Commission, on the other hand on behalf of the Commission or the applicable
Participating Member State, may initiate such informal dispute resolution by
sending written notice of the dispute to the other Party, and, within twenty (20)
days of such notice, the Executive Officers shall meet and attempt to resolve the
dispute by good faith negotiations.
(b) Each of the Commission, the Participating Member States and AstraZeneca
irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located in Brussels,
Belgium to settle any dispute which may arise under or in connection with this
Agreement or the legal relationships established by this Agreement.
18.4. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of Belgium.
18.5. Resolution.
(a) In the event of a dispute arising under this Agreement between the Parties, the
Parties shall first refer such dispute to informal dispute resolution discussions
between their respective Executive Officers. AstraZeneca, on the one hand, or the
Commission, on the other hand on behalf of the Commission or the applicable
Participating Member State, may initiate such informal dispute resolution by
sending written notice of the dispute to the other Party, and, within twenty (20)
days of such notice, the Executive Officers shall meet and attempt to resolve the
dispute by good faith negotiations.
(b) Each of the Commission, the Participating Member States and AstraZeneca
irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located in Brussels,
Belgium to settle any dispute which may arise under or in connection with this
Agreement or the legal relationships established by this Agreement.
vikingaero said:
If I were Boris I would insist all spare vaccines travel only by plain trucks to Dover. They queue like other freight - no queue jumping. If the French and EU don't want to process them in a timely fashion then hey...
I would also insist that the deliveries are conditional that no MEP or EU Leader is allowed any UK or EU vaccine until 70% of the European population is vaccinated...
i would add with ham sandwiches and the "wrong" paperwork I would also insist that the deliveries are conditional that no MEP or EU Leader is allowed any UK or EU vaccine until 70% of the European population is vaccinated...
also all the vaccines must have a uk flag on them
paulrockliffe said:
maz8062 said:
Wrong advice IMO. If I were Boris I’d be looking at ways to diffuse this row, even going as far as offering a slice of UK production to make up the EU shortfall.
It is obvious that the EU are looking to paint the UK as the bad guys and justify vaccine export controls - which we must try to avoid at all costs, because once these controls are introduced it will cover a whole load of vaccines, not just COVID.
We’re a third country now, we need to be diplomatic with our dealings with the ROW.
LOL.It is obvious that the EU are looking to paint the UK as the bad guys and justify vaccine export controls - which we must try to avoid at all costs, because once these controls are introduced it will cover a whole load of vaccines, not just COVID.
We’re a third country now, we need to be diplomatic with our dealings with the ROW.
It's been thrown to the court of public opinion now. Do you think the UK population will support a policy of appeasement towards the EU while it means our elderly dying?
The EU Justice Commissioner has accused us of wanting to start a vaccine war today. The Croatian PM has accused us of hijacking their vaccines.
Yet it's for us to appease the EU regardless of how unreasonable their demands are.
This pandemic is so serious that I can't see the EC/EU simply grandstanding on this issue. All of the countries behind it will be demanding strong, decisive action.
We are in Europe and are dependant on Europe and the EU for a number of things, so it's certainly not as clean and simple as egging on David vs Goliath.
loafer123 said:
Craig W said:
Can anyone give a tl;dr for this thread? I've read some of the news stories but can't quite get clear in my head what is being argued?
Eu cocked up ordering process...trying to make noise and bully everyone into submission in order to cover up said cockup.
k themselves - gravy train riding, non elected, supercilious, pompous aholespaulrockliffe said:
LOL.
It's been thrown to the court of public opinion now. Do you think the UK population will support a policy of appeasement towards the EU while it means our elderly dying?
The EU Justice Commissioner has accused us of wanting to start a vaccine war today. The Croatian PM has accused us of hijacking their vaccines.
Yet it's for us to appease the EU regardless of how unreasonable their demands are.
It won't be a good look for the UK if it subsequently transpires the UK was stockpiling while elderly in other countries died though. I'm not saying they are, but they are seeking to keep their supply secret.It's been thrown to the court of public opinion now. Do you think the UK population will support a policy of appeasement towards the EU while it means our elderly dying?
The EU Justice Commissioner has accused us of wanting to start a vaccine war today. The Croatian PM has accused us of hijacking their vaccines.
Yet it's for us to appease the EU regardless of how unreasonable their demands are.
https://twitter.com/SpinningHugo/status/1355125338...
Interesting thread from a contract lawyer
Interesting thread from a contract lawyer
spinninghugo said:
The Commission is now trying to grab doses that only exist because of a manufacturing ramp up done under another prior contract with someone else.
AZ is saying "we don't have to deliver those to you."
The Commission's argument that because the doses have been manufactured at plants that AZ has agreed to source its doses for them from, so that they must as a result be allocated to them, is extremely weak.
The Commission is only entitled to those doses that AZ have, after best reasonable efforts, produced for them under their contract. This attempt to grab doses only in existence because of another prior contract is a disgrace.
AZ is saying "we don't have to deliver those to you."
The Commission's argument that because the doses have been manufactured at plants that AZ has agreed to source its doses for them from, so that they must as a result be allocated to them, is extremely weak.
The Commission is only entitled to those doses that AZ have, after best reasonable efforts, produced for them under their contract. This attempt to grab doses only in existence because of another prior contract is a disgrace.
Electro1980 said:
chrispmartha said:
If they are relying on that they are on a hiding to nothing. All that says to me is that AZ could supply from outside the EU should they need too and are able but will try to do it all in the EU. No way could any reasonable person take that as “we will fulfil your order using other factories if we have too regardless of other commitments”
Either that or it's extraordinarily sloppy drafting.
Durzel said:
This issue is pretty much a slam dunk for fans of Brexit. It's hard not to see this as a massive win, even if by luck, for the UK. At best the EU comes off looking like bullies, and frankly they look pretty incompetent if they've only been managed to sign contracts 3 months later than the UK, and what they have signed actually doesn't work in their favour either.
Even The Guardian are running with a EU-negative headline accompanying a pretty "mean" looking photo of the Commission president.
Speaking as someone who very much wanted to remain in the EU - I have to agree.Even The Guardian are running with a EU-negative headline accompanying a pretty "mean" looking photo of the Commission president.
Stu T said:
"I'll add my two cents as a UK and EU qualified lawyer (not Belgian qualified so can't add any nuances there) after an initial read.
It's clear from Clauses 5.1 and 5.4 that the obligation to establish both the manufacturing facilities and then deliver the vaccines are "best reasonable efforts". This term is defined in the contract, but certainly is not strict liability. I.e. AZ just has to reasonably try it's best. I'll chalk that as a win for AZ.
Clause 5.4 does refer to AZ using best reasonable efforts to establish manufacturing facilities in both the EU AND UK. However, Clause 5.1 (which is the relevant provision regarding actually delivery of the vaccine doses), only refers to those doses being manufactured within the EU (and not UK). So basically there is no commitment for AZ to deliver any doses from outside the EU. I'll chalk that as a win for AZ too.
TLDR: contract looks bad for the Commission, not even sure what their arguments even are at this point. AZ's position seems like a slam dunk to me from an initial read.
Edit: corrected to remove reference to Clause 6.2 as people have rightly pointed out that refers to EU agreements"
from:
https://old.reddit.com/r/CoronavirusUK/comments/l7...
edit, added quotes to clarify that isn't my comment
The comment does not read like that of a lawyer. To one sided. It's clear from Clauses 5.1 and 5.4 that the obligation to establish both the manufacturing facilities and then deliver the vaccines are "best reasonable efforts". This term is defined in the contract, but certainly is not strict liability. I.e. AZ just has to reasonably try it's best. I'll chalk that as a win for AZ.
Clause 5.4 does refer to AZ using best reasonable efforts to establish manufacturing facilities in both the EU AND UK. However, Clause 5.1 (which is the relevant provision regarding actually delivery of the vaccine doses), only refers to those doses being manufactured within the EU (and not UK). So basically there is no commitment for AZ to deliver any doses from outside the EU. I'll chalk that as a win for AZ too.
TLDR: contract looks bad for the Commission, not even sure what their arguments even are at this point. AZ's position seems like a slam dunk to me from an initial read.
Edit: corrected to remove reference to Clause 6.2 as people have rightly pointed out that refers to EU agreements"
from:
https://old.reddit.com/r/CoronavirusUK/comments/l7...
edit, added quotes to clarify that isn't my comment
The best efforts language certainly supports AZ CEO interview.
However, without seeing the UK AZ agreement it hard to know who is in the wrong.
If we assume the UK AZ is similar to the EU AZ agreement. No specific details of where the vaccine is supplied from and a best efforts clause.
I am not sure that justifies AZ supplying the UK contract in total and scaling back the EU.
Once again we just do not know.
vikingaero said:
If I were Boris I would insist all spare vaccines travel only by plain trucks to Dover. They queue like other freight - no queue jumping. If the French and EU don't want to process them in a timely fashion then hey...
I would also insist that the deliveries are conditional that no MEP or EU Leader is allowed any UK or EU vaccine until 70% of the European population is vaccinated...
I'd go one further - tell the EU that any trucks containing vaccine will be placed in a queue behind all the perishable loads that their customs are currently doing their best to disrupt.I would also insist that the deliveries are conditional that no MEP or EU Leader is allowed any UK or EU vaccine until 70% of the European population is vaccinated...
NRS said:
"AstraZeneca has also explicitly assured us in this contract that no other obligations would prevent the contract from being fulfilled," Ursula von der Leyen said.
Anyone been able to find this?
That would be Clause 13. Anyone been able to find this?
However a number of legal experts here say that prior clauses put AZ in a strong position.
I will defer to their opinion.
We will see though.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
NRS said:
"AstraZeneca has also explicitly assured us in this contract that no other obligations would prevent the contract from being fulfilled," Ursula von der Leyen said.
Anyone been able to find this?
13.1.(e)Anyone been able to find this?
jsf said:
If you have ever created anything physical you will be aware that sometimes despite your best endeavours that something can be a failure and you have to start again. (Thats why when making new components for an F1 car we cast more castings than we need as final products to cater for inclusions or machining errors)
That is why in this case time is of the essence in getting the program started as it can take longer than you hoped if you encounter problems.
Welcome to creating a vaccine at scale on a new site.
Its unreal this has to even be stated. It's like watching a 5 year old stomping their feet because they didn't get their own way. It's absolute classic pen pusher syndrome meeting the reality of the physical world for the first time.
How do you defend the morons in the EU on this one? It's completely nuts.
Just catching up from where i left off yesterday so apologies if this has been covered later. That is why in this case time is of the essence in getting the program started as it can take longer than you hoped if you encounter problems.
Welcome to creating a vaccine at scale on a new site.
Its unreal this has to even be stated. It's like watching a 5 year old stomping their feet because they didn't get their own way. It's absolute classic pen pusher syndrome meeting the reality of the physical world for the first time.
How do you defend the morons in the EU on this one? It's completely nuts.
As far as my limited reading today has shown vaccine production is not even as "simple" as producing F1 car parts, where for instance a CNC machine can produce X number of parts per day. Vaccine production can be designed and expected to produce X number of vaccines but the virus behaves in an unexpected way it ends up producing X -75%.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff