COVID Vaccine !

[Rusty Nails]

I am not a lawyer either, but I don't think "signed first" matters unless the second customer wishes to accuse the seller of acting in bad faith, of selling something that they knew they would not have by the delivery date.

I think ideally, the seller would try to renegotiate one or both of the contracts as soon as they realise there's a delivery problem. They would probably offer better terms to the most profitable contract or customer (and those are not always the same thing in the long term) if they can, but if they can't renegotiate anything, then they would have to terminate whichever contract has the cheapest termination payments stated in it, rather than land in court over it... and if that customer wanted to try to take them to court over it, I hope the courts would take a dim view over them rejecting the agreed termination payment. If there is no termination clause in one or both contracts, then it's a cluster fark mixed with a shoot show and the negotiators should be chewed out, or at least nibbled a bit.

To all who are saying that it is the EU's fault, I would suggest that it is very likely that the EU factories were listed as production capacity for the UK order, in a mirror-image of the EU contract. Of course we don't know that unless the UK-AZ contract is published too, but I suspect we are basically in @Yellow Fang's example, but with the glare of publicity and politics involved.

One complication is that having sold production from the UK factories to someone else does not appear to be a permitted reason for AZ to terminate their EU contract - and even if they had somehow contrived to fail to obtain EMA authorisation today, clause II.14.1 says they cannot legally sell the vaccines from the UK and EU factories to anyone else in that case.

Exactly this. Is anyone on here a lawyer with experience of international agreements such as this?

If it goes to a legal case then we will find out, but in the meantime I suspect opinions will vary based in part on how much people are for or against Brexit.

I do not trust Johnson's opinion on this matter but neither do I really trust von Der Leyen or Kyriakides. They all have constituencies to serve, and I suspect it will be resolved by negotiation, compromise and a few threats.

 

[srw]

gets us a bit more back to normal

It doesn't. That's precisely my point. "Normal" life can't resume until most of the world is protected. We can have a semblance of normal life as the Australians and New Zealanders are experiencing it, in which no-one can enter the UK. But that's not normality. And it's why this:

gatecrash our party

is fatuous. It's not "our party". It's the world's party. And like it or not, our world starts in Europe. It's in our national interest to get the rest of Europe vaccinated as quickly as is humanly possible, because a semi-normality in which we can travel freely around Europe and other Europeans can come and visit is a damn sight more normal than a semi-normality in which we're stuck in the UK.

 

[mjr]

I read that the EU are preparing to invoke Article 122 against AstraZenica, which would allow them to take control of their business and raid their intellectual property with a view to reproducing their vaccines by other manufacturers. What is the point? By the time they do that AZ would probably have sorted out their yield issues. The same article says the EU spent 1/7th as much per capita on their vaccines as the UK.

Article 122 of what? There are only Articles 1 to 6 in the published EU-AZ agreement. Sections 11 and 12(c)(ii) of that agreement would assign the intellectual property and manufacturing contracts to the EC if terminated anyway — including the UK manufacturing, which might cause problems for the UK-AZ contract!

There doesn't seem to be much need for the EU to take control of AZ and I think I can see why AZ isn't rushing to terminate the contract!

 

[mjr]

It's not "our party". It's the world's party. And like it or not, our world starts in Europe. It's in our national interest to get the rest of Europe vaccinated as quickly as is humanly possible, because a semi-normality in which we can travel freely around Europe and other Europeans can come and visit is a damn sight more normal than a semi-normality in which we're stuck in the UK.

Amen. Were we "gatecrashing the EU's party" when we only had the vaccine developed by Biontech in Germany and made by Puurs in Belgium? Nationalists seem to have short memories.

 

[Ajax Bay]

An insight (not new - Oct 20) into the background of UK's vaccine procurement strategy - in 'The Lancet' written by the Head of VTF, Kate Bingham. (I have precised.) Comment: I wonder if she (with no doubt excellent help) is as good as picking winning horses?
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32175-9/fulltext

The Vaccine Task Force (VTF) strategy was to build a diverse portfolio across different formats to give the UK the greatest chance of providing a safe and effective vaccine, recognising that many, and possibly all, of these vaccines could fail. Scalability of vaccine manufacture was also a key criterion, with the goal being to manufacture in the UK, if possible, to secure supply and create long-term resilience. We considered only vaccines that have the potential for . . . delivery as early as the end of 2020 or, at the latest, in the second half of 2021.

VTF has now secured access to six vaccines (from more than 240 vaccines in development) across four different formats: adenoviral vectors, mRNA, adjuvanted proteins, and whole inactivated viral vaccines, which are promising in different ways. The most advanced [in terms of trials as at Oct 20] vaccines, such as those developed by AstraZeneca/University of Oxford, BioNTech and Pfizer, and Janssen, are based on novel formats . . . , although the initial immunogenicity and safety data are encouraging.

To help to accelerate the development of successful vaccines, we launched the NHS COVID-19 vaccine registry and have enrolled over 295 000 volunteers, [eg @winjim ]👍👍 [Think it ended up at over 400,000.]

A major challenge is that the global manufacturing capacity for vaccines is vastly inadequate for the billions of doses that are needed, and the UK manufacturing capability to date has been equally scarce. The VTF has provided funding for flexible and surge production in several new UK sites for vaccine manufacture to provide the UK population with a new vaccine . . . . We also plan to bring new vaccine technologies and capabilities to the UK for future pandemic preparedness.

We cannot, however, protect the UK without working with our international partners to protect the world. SARS-CoV-2 is a global pandemic with a toll of over 1·1 million deaths. No one is safe until we are all safe. Pandemic viruses do not respect national borders.
There will not be one successful vaccine, or one single country, that is able to supply the world. We urgently need international cooperation to pool risks and costs, address barriers to access, and scale up the manufacturing capacity to produce sufficient doses to protect everyone at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection globally.

The UK is committed to ensuring that . . . the world, has access to a safe and effective vaccine. The [world] COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility, to which the UK has committed £548 million, will deliver vaccines for the UK population and provide access to vaccines for lower income countries. Working with GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, WHO [https://www.who.int/initiatives/act-accelerator/covax], and a broad alliance of 180 nations, this pooling of resources maximises the chances of securing access to a vaccine and making it available to all who need it.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus is likely to evolve, and other zoonotic pathogens are likely to pose future risks. China, Europe, the USA, and the UK need to work together. If we establish international collaboration right now, then we will be better prepared to control future pandemics without causing the largest global recession in history and the biggest threat to lives in living memory.

 

[Yellow Fang]

Straw man alert!

I am saying that whatever we do to vaccinate our own vulnerable population (and it's really good that we're doing well) is meaningless for long-term protection while there are still unvaccinated vulnerable out there in whom the virus can mutate.

I am sure AZ's vaccine will come in very useful there; it being sold at cost price and not needing cold storage. Mind you, I am not sure it's true that vaccinating our older population is meaningless long-term unless the entire world is vaccinated. Scientists think Covid will become endemic like cold and flu. Flu vaccine makers have to change their vaccines every couple of years. I don't think the entire world is vaccinated against flu, and still our older population get some protection. There is probably no point in vaccinating the world for flu because of all the cross species virus jumps, particular in the far east. They'd have to vaccinate all the poultry and livestock as well. Still, I am not arguing against vaccinating the entire world population, but I expect a lot of populations will be hard to reach, and they won't be under our control.

 

[Yellow Fang]

Article 122 of what? There are only Articles 1 to 6 in the published EU-AZ agreement. Sections 11 and 12(c)(ii) of that agreement would assign the intellectual property and manufacturing contracts to the EC if terminated anyway — including the UK manufacturing, which might cause problems for the UK-AZ contract!

There doesn't seem to be much need for the EU to take control of AZ and I think I can see why AZ isn't rushing to terminate the contract!

Article 122 of the Lisbon Treaty.

 

[mjr]

Article 122 of the Lisbon Treaty.

The Lisbon Treaty had 7 Articles. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:TOC

Has someone been feeding you shoot?

 

[Yellow Fang]

The Lisbon Treaty had 7 Articles. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:TOC

Has someone been feeding you shoot?

That's odd. I thought I heard a lot about an Article 50 the last few years.

 

[BoldonLad]

From macro to micro.

No word on my jab yet, which I should have by February 15 if the government is to reach its target.

Even if a letter arrived tomorrow, there would still be a week or so before the appointment.

Looks like this one is going down to the wire.

Same here.

Not related to Covid, but, had my annual medication review today, Nurse told me, my GP Surgery is not doing the Jabs (not sure why, lack of available space I would guess), so, presumably we will be sent to a vaccine centre somewhere. The Sunderland Nightingale Hospital is almost within walking distance, so, presumably, we will be sent elsewhere.

 

[Ajax Bay]

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12008E122:EN:HTML
Article 122 (ex Article 100 TEC) 1. Without prejudice to any other procedures provided for in the Treaties, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may decide, in a spirit of solidarity between Member States, upon the measures appropriate to the economic situation, in particular if severe difficulties arise in the supply of certain products,

 

[Julia9054]

Same here.

Not related to Covid, but, had my annual medication review today, Nurse told me, my GP Surgery is not doing the Jabs (not sure why, lack of available space I would guess), so, presumably we will be sent to a vaccine centre somewhere. The Sunderland Nightingale Hospital is almost within walking distance, so, presumably, we will be sent elsewhere.

I know 3 people in their 70s in Harrogate who have appointments for their vaccinations and are being sent to York (22 miles away) despite there being a vaccination centre at the Great Yorkshire Showground in Harrogate. 2 of them literally live just over the fence!

 

[Adam4868]

I've noticed a few vaccination centres popping up around me.Saw one being set up in a church on my work/travels in St Anne's today.Took my mum for her first jab last night.

 

[mjr]

That's odd. I thought I heard a lot about an Article 50 the last few years.

That was Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (aka the Maastricht Treaty). Most of the stuff I've seen about various non-existent articles of the Lisbon Treaty the last few years has been scams about nonsense like how we will be conscripted into an EU Army and forced to invade Poland Russia or whatever.

 

[lane]

It doesn't. That's precisely my point. "Normal" life can't resume until most of the world is protected. We can have a semblance of normal life as the Australians and New Zealanders are experiencing it, in which no-one can enter the UK. But that's not normality. And it's why this:

is fatuous. It's not "our party". It's the world's party. And like it or not, our world starts in Europe. It's in our national interest to get the rest of Europe vaccinated as quickly as is humanly possible, because a semi-normality in which we can travel freely around Europe and other Europeans can come and visit is a damn sight more normal than a semi-normality in which we're stuck in the UK.

The national interest is surely to get ourselves vaccinated first and others later.

If not tell me this: how is it better for me that a German or Frenchman I'd vaccinated in March rather than me?