THE FIRST SLA<\/b><\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
1.\u00a0\u00a0 Signed on 29 June 2005<\/p>\n
2.\u00a0 This is an incomprehensible document in that it was obviously not drafted by a person with any legal knowledge or legal drafting skills.<\/p>\n
3. With regard to the provisions regulating the payment of suppliers and of the so-called \u201cconsultant\u201d, the provisions are fundamentally contradictory, in that:<\/p>\n
3.1 Clause 5.8.1, under the heading \u201cPayments\u201d provides that \u201cpayments of all the suppliers for all LTSM shall be made, \u201con the basis of a consultancy fee<\/span>, paid out after completing a trench [sic] of work by the Department after placing of orders with manufacturers to the consultants who, in turn, shall pay manufacturers.\u201d\u00a0 <\/i><\/p>\n 3.2 This provision is gibberish:\u00a0 how can a supplier of stationary be \u201cpaid on the basis of a consultancy fee\u201d for stationary he supplied, presumably on the basis of a VAT invoice for goods sold and delivered?<\/p>\n 3.3 What is meant by the phrase in 5.8.2 \u201cby the Department after placing orders with manufacturers (in this respect this document appears to be the product of a cut and paste exercise from a different document that bears no relation to the subject matter at hand.\u00a0 When exactly is the Department to pay?<\/p>\n 3.4 Why must the Department pay the consultant and he must in turn pay the manufacturers?<\/p>\n 3.5 But, in any event the clause cannot be reconciled with 7.1.4. which says that: \u201cThe Department of Education agrees to pay the consultant for the procurement component 100% of the procurement order on proof of the procurement placement.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" THE FIRST SLA 1.\u00a0\u00a0 Signed on 29 June 2005 2.\u00a0 This is an incomprehensible document in that it was obviously not drafted by a person with any legal knowledge or legal drafting skills. 3. With regard to the provisions regulating the payment of suppliers and of the so-called \u201cconsultant\u201d, the provisions are fundamentally contradictory, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-443","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\n