View Single Post
10-27-2012, 08:42 PM
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
mouser's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 18,402
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Right. It exists but its unenforceable (with no certainty it will ever be enforceable again). Which is as good as if it didn't exist. This is why I'm saying it's basically semantics whether you say the contract disappears or not. This isn't a contract law class, there's no need to stand on ceremony and use the magic words. You can use the ones that convey the facts to your audience.
Well, no it's not "as good as if it didn't exist". The conditions under which the contracts could become enforceable again are not all under the unilateral control of the NHL. Portraying the situation as you're trying to do distorts the facts to create an incorrect simplification.

The most simple examples of contracts becoming enforceable being if one of the provinces ruled favorably for the players in their labor complaints. Or the more dramatic outcome if the PA were able to successfully decertify.

mouser is offline