Non-Hedging Party - Equity Derivatives Provision: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Text replace - "{{eqderivanatomy}}" to "{{anat|eqderiv}}")
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{eqderivsnap|12.9(xii)}}
{{eqderivsnap|12.9(a)(xii)}}
====Commentary====
====Commentary====
Note hugely controversial, you wuold think, but it does sort of imply that the {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}} is itself a party to the transaction - otherwise ''both'' parties are {{eqderivprov|Non-Hedging Parties}}. But if so, then there's not really any need for the definition of {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}} at all ...
Note hugely controversial, you wuold think, but it does sort of imply that the {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}} is itself a party to the transaction - otherwise ''both'' parties are {{eqderivprov|Non-Hedging Parties}}. But if so, then there's not really any need for the definition of {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}} at all ...

Revision as of 17:04, 17 May 2022

Template:Eqderivsnap

Commentary

Note hugely controversial, you wuold think, but it does sort of imply that the Hedging Party is itself a party to the transaction - otherwise both parties are Non-Hedging Parties. But if so, then there's not really any need for the definition of Hedging Party at all ...

Related Provisions

Equity Derivatives Anatomy™

{{{2}}}

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.