|
|
Enron Mail |
Sandeep,
It probably makes sense for you to directly coordinate the signing of the contract for Henwood. Attached is another copy of the earlier email containing a draft contract provided by Bonnie Nelson in legal. She would still like to change section 6 on exclusivity. Her number in Houston is 713 646 7712. Let me know whatever I can do to help. --Stinson ---------------------- Forwarded by Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT on 01/18/2001 08:43 AM --------------------------- Bonnie Nelson@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 01/11/2001 12:51 PM To: Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sandeep Kohli/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Subject: Re: CA for Henwood engagement Stinson, Attached please find a draft Consulting Agreement for use with Henwood. You will want to review it before you send it to Henwood. Please see Section 6 in particular. Also, I put in that arbitration will be in Houston and Texas law will apply. We could move that to New York, with New York law if that is better for Henwood. If pressed, we could make it Singapore or U.K. law, with arb in Singapore. but any other law, including Australian law, would mean we would need to get this contract reviewed by foreign counsel--so I strongly urge you to argue for Texas or NY law (no other state, please). I tried to make this Agreement reflect the terms in Henwood's proposal, and believe I succeeded. Our form has some additional terms not contained in their Proposal, as well as FCPA boilerplate (ie., the "Business Conduct" and "Drug Policy" language). Also, I just want to point out that this Agreement allows them to subcontract the work--but only with our written agreement. Under their Proposal, the subcontractor costs will be charged to us at cost plus 15%--so you might not want to do it. Please let me know if you have any comments or questions. Bonnie
|