Template:Sovereign immunity in master agreements: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "===Sovereign immunity and the Cassanova problem=== The fact that (unless agreed otherwise) Sovereign Immunity Act 19..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Now in the architecture of the {{isdama}} this involves writing in the {{isdaprov|Schedule}}, something like “Section {{isdaprov|13(d)}} shall not apply to Party A or Party B”. Is this mere silence on the matter, or is it ''an explicit agreement to contract out of it''? | Now in the architecture of the {{isdama}} this involves writing in the {{isdaprov|Schedule}}, something like “Section {{isdaprov|13(d)}} shall not apply to Party A or Party B”. Is this mere silence on the matter, or is it ''an explicit agreement to contract out of it''? | ||
Had the {{isdama}} only had the sense to shut up about [[sovereign immunity]] in the first place, there would have been no problem: [[what the eye | Had the {{isdama}} only had the sense to shut up about [[sovereign immunity]] in the first place, there would have been no problem: [[what the eye don’t see the chef gets away with]]. | ||
This will still be the stance you find yourself having to adopt. “I am not agreeing that [[sovereign immunity]] ''applies'',” you will find yourself maintaining to the insistent gaze of your [[credit officer]]. “I am simply ''not'' saying that it ''doesn’t'' apply.” | This will still be the stance you find yourself having to adopt. “I am not agreeing that [[sovereign immunity]] ''applies'',” you will find yourself maintaining to the insistent gaze of your [[credit officer]]. “I am simply ''not'' saying that it ''doesn’t'' apply.” | ||
This falls short of what the [[Sovereign Immunity Act 1978]] requires for [[sovereign immunity]] to kick in. Hold that confident smile until it hurts. | This falls short of what the [[Sovereign Immunity Act 1978]] requires for [[sovereign immunity]] to kick in. Hold that confident smile until it hurts. | ||
Latest revision as of 15:40, 23 April 2020
Sovereign immunity and the Cassanova problem
The fact that (unless agreed otherwise) Sovereign Immunity generally doesn’t apply to commercial contracts doesn’t stop industry standard commercial contracts purporting nonetheless waive that immunity which, in a ghastly ironic turn, makes sovereign immunity more likely to apply. For you may be sure agents, when representing sovereigns, will protest they do not have their client’s authority to waive its sovereign privileges. They will find themselves compelled, by the terms of their agency, to insist the waiver is deleted.
Now in the architecture of the ISDA Master Agreement this involves writing in the Schedule, something like “Section 13(d) shall not apply to Party A or Party B”. Is this mere silence on the matter, or is it an explicit agreement to contract out of it?
Had the ISDA Master Agreement only had the sense to shut up about sovereign immunity in the first place, there would have been no problem: what the eye don’t see the chef gets away with.
This will still be the stance you find yourself having to adopt. “I am not agreeing that sovereign immunity applies,” you will find yourself maintaining to the insistent gaze of your credit officer. “I am simply not saying that it doesn’t apply.”
This falls short of what the Sovereign Immunity Act 1978 requires for sovereign immunity to kick in. Hold that confident smile until it hurts.