In our opinion, the public interest in principle should not recognize the validity of an agreement according to which a dispatcher may act maliciously or unfairly. Such an agreement is void as it is illegal. Therefore, a breach of fiduciary duties can be waived if the breach is done negligently. The waiver does not take effect, if the violation is intentional. Hence, the duties of trust are partly dispositive and partly cogent. Indeed, the duty of good faith also has a cogent lower threshold, beyond which the parties cannot descend, and their agreement does not raise or lower it. Certainly, the consent of the sender and the sender cannot go beyond this lower threshold. On our own, it seems to us that a "higher" lower threshold is required in the relationship between sender and sender. Trying to go beyond that threshold will not succeed. The result may be the nullity of the instruction [emphases added].
These words, which are generally beautiful for all types of emissaries, are reinforced when it comes to the lawyers who represent the purchasing group and its members. This is in view of their weakened status, and the great dependence that their property affairs depend on others. In view of the nature of the relationship between the parties, the cogent core must be expanded, in the context of the purchasing groups, which the agreement of the parties cannot penetrate.
- To conclude this general presentation, I will note that sometimes the lawyer, who walks through the world of the purchasing groups and provides them with representation, may find himself in the position of interests. On the one hand, in most cases, he accompanies the group's organizer from the outset, and provides legal advice that helps formulate her business vision. He serves as its attorney and is loyal to its duties of trust. However, once the acquisition group was established, and he also serves as its attorney, he owes fiduciary duties to the members of the group as well.
And the debts may clash.