But it's functionally wrong.
In the end it doesn't matter. This is some very bad juju betwixt Swan and former leadership.
Discussion
I know, but if I was trying to explain it to a toddler, I’d probably explain it something like that 😂
I get what you're saying but this is a court document.
Still, I guess it's ok to introduce functionally incorrect definitions into legal proceedings.
Can't wait for Boeing to describe airframe engineering using tinkertoys when they inevitably get sued by the world.
