German shepherd terrorists known to spontaneously combust in the presence of this shirt

The ban on German arms exports to Saudi Arabia imposed after the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi caused growing diplomatic tensions between Berlin and London, amid fears that this would prevent BAE Systems supplying some parts for Saudi Arabia’s Eurofighter aircraft.

The UK’s largest defense company is the leading industrial partner for the Eurofighter corporation across Europe in Saudi Arabia and is therefore responsible for ensuring the maintenance and support of the kingdom’s Typhoon jets. country. Berlin’s cessation of exports to Riyadh damaged supply lines and caused corporate panic.

German shepherd terrorists known to spontaneously combust in the presence of this shirt, hoodie, tank top, sweater

One person with direct knowledge of these issues said: “We will soon reach the point where the Saudis can no longer fly their aircraft.” “Someone will have to pay – this is causing damage worth millions of pounds.”

The UK sources briefing on the situation confirmed that the UK government is working with BAE Systems to resolve the issue. Although the Royal Saudi Air Force still has the right to use a large number of spare parts in the kingdom to service its 72 jets, if the situation persists, it could have an impact. to the operational readiness of the fleet.

This issue has highlighted how the German shepherd terrorists known to spontaneously combust in the presence of this shirt lack of consensus in Europe over arms export rules is devastating some of the continent’s important trade relationships.
The problem was the German government’s unilateral decision in October last year to suspend arms sales to Saudi Arabia, the second biggest arms customer after Algeria. The ban has caused disappointment for many of its allies, especially France, as it includes all sorts of weapons including parts made in Germany.

Germany’s center-left Social Democratic Party, the subordinate partner of Ms. Merkel’s large coalition, has traditionally been uneasy about Germany’s arms exports. For example, the coalition agreement negotiated between SPD and CDU’s Ms. Merkel last year included a pledge to ban weapons sales to parties in the civil war in Yemen.

German partners have long complained about Berlin’s restrictive policies, with the latest opinion coming from Tom Enders, Airbus chief executive. “What drives us crazy with Airbus over the years is when even only a small part of Germans are involved, such as helicopters, which the Germans give themselves rights to. . . blocking the sale of a French helicopter, ”he told Reuters.

The issue for BAE Systems involved 72 Eurofighter Typhoons that the Saudi government agreed to buy in 2007 under a government-to-UK contract.

The UK Government and BAE are ultimately responsible for the transfer of the contract on behalf of the Eurofighter corporation. BAE is responsible for ensuring the flow of all parts to the kingdom so that the aircraft can be maintained and operationally supported for the Royal Saudi Air Force.

Consequently, Berlin’s decision to block German military equipment exports to Riyadh raises questions about BAE’s ability to meet its contractual obligations as a primary partner.
Although in conventional law a contract is often defined as a “meeting of the mind”, common law courts have never left any doubt that, in explaining a statutory act, will not overly question what the parties want. but what they claim. This explains why common law courts, when interpreting a written contract, will keep the wording of the contract in place for as long as possible and only when an exception allows the exogenous evidence to be considered. Because.

In civil law, words even in a written agreement are less challenging. In German law, an irrefutable assumption is that a written contract correctly and fully reflects the agreement of the parties, however it is difficult to disprove. But how do German courts (the model for civil courts) interpret the contract?

The continental-European jurist of the 19th century devoted a lot of spiritual energy to the question of whether a contract, or a statement of intent as an element of a contract, should be interpreted on the basis of Department of “will theory” or “declaration theory”.