83,240
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The {{{{{1}}}|Affected Party}} is thewho is subject to a Section {{{{{1}}}|5(b)}} {{{{{1}}}|Termination Event}}, but not a Section {{{{{1}}}|5(a)}} {{{{{1}}}|Event of Default}} — thus one of a marginally less opprobrious character, seeing as {{{{{1}}}|Termination Event}}s are generally not considered to be one’s ''fault'' as such, but just sad things that happen that no-one expected, or wanted, but bring what was once a beautiful relationship to an end. It’s not you, it’s — well, it’s not me either — it’s just that confounded [[Tax Event Upon Merger - ISDA Provision|tax event that occurred upon your recent merger]]. | |||
Note that, in its wisdom, {{icds}} chose not to have a generic term for the sort of person who is subject to ''either'' a {{{{{1}}}|Termination Event}} ''or'' an {{{{{1}}}|Event of Default}}, so there is much “{{{{{1}}}|Defaulting Party}} [[and/or]] {{{{{1}}}|Affected Party}}, [[as the case may be]]” sort of malarkey. This depresses we prose stylists, but {{icds}} has ''never'' cared about us, so we should hardly be surprised. | Note that, in its wisdom, {{icds}} chose not to have a generic term for the sort of person who is subject to ''either'' a {{{{{1}}}|Termination Event}} ''or'' an {{{{{1}}}|Event of Default}}, so there is much “{{{{{1}}}|Defaulting Party}} [[and/or]] {{{{{1}}}|Affected Party}}, [[as the case may be]]” sort of malarkey. This depresses we prose stylists, but {{icds}} has ''never'' cared about us, so we should hardly be surprised. | ||
===Non-affected Party=== | |||
Don’t forget there is also a definition of {{{{{1}}}|Non-Affected Party}} which is, well, as you would expect: | |||
{{quote| | |||
{{ISDA Master Agreement 2002 Non-affected Party}}}} | |||
{{Difference between Affected Party and Defaulting Party|{{{1}}}}} | {{Difference between Affected Party and Defaulting Party|{{{1}}}}} |