Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 3(a): Difference between revisions

Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 3(a) (view source)

Revision as of 19:15, 2 February 2020

10 bytes removed , 2 February 2020

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

83,493

edits

Revision as of 19:00, 2 February 2020 (view source) Amwelladmin (talk \| contribs) (Created page with "An observant negotiator (is there any other kind?) handling a {{1992ma}} might wish to add a new agency rep as Section {{isdaprov\|3(a)(vi)}}. The framers of the {{isdama}}...")		Revision as of 19:15, 2 February 2020 (view source) Amwelladmin (talk \| contribs) No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	An observant [[negotiator]] (is there any other kind?) handling a {{1992ma}} might wish to add a new agency rep as Section {{~~isdaprov~~\|3(a)(vi)}}. ~~The framers of the~~ {{~~isdama~~}} obviously thought this was such a good idea that they added a brand-new “no-agency” rep to the {{2002ma}}, only they can’t have felt it was basic enough to go in the {{isdaprov\|Basic Representations}}, so they put it in a new clause all by itself at Section {{isdaprov\|3(g)}}.		An observant [[negotiator]] (is there any other kind?) handling a {{1992ma}} might wish to add a new agency rep as Section {{isda92prov\|3(a)(vi)}}. In 2002, {{icds}} obviously thought this was such a good idea that they added a brand-new “no-agency” rep to the {{2002ma}}, only they can’t have felt it was basic enough to go in the {{isdaprov\|Basic Representations}}, so they put it in a new clause all by itself at Section {{isdaprov\|3(g)}}.

	But you don’t need a bespoke no-agency rep if you’re on a {{2002ma}}, if that’s what you’re wondering.		But you don’t need a bespoke no-agency rep if you’re on a {{2002ma}}, if that’s what you’re wondering.