Template:M comp disc 2002 ISDA 5(a)(viii): Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "As the comparison (see panel below right) illustrates, {{icds}} giveth and {{icds}} taketh away. A neatly excised square of flannel departs, another one, further itemising way..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Replaced content with "{{isda 5(a)(viii) comp|isdaprov}}" Tag: Replaced |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{isda 5(a)(viii) comp|isdaprov}} | |||
Latest revision as of 16:16, 24 December 2023
Redlines
- 1987 ⇒ 1992: Redline of the ’92 vs. the ’87: comparison (and in reverse)
- 1992 ⇒ 2002: Redline of the ’02 vs. the ’92: comparison (and in reverse)
- 1987 ⇒ 2002: Redline of the ’92 vs. the ’87: comparison (and in reverse)
Discussion
ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ giveth and ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ taketh away.
In 1992, ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ added references to a party’s Credit Support Providers and Credit Support Documents — the 1987 ISDA did not have a concept of a Credit Support Provider at all (though it does contemplate Credit Support Documents).
In 2002 some further enhancements: ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ had contrived some different ways of describing how a company might reorganise itself (specifically, “reorganisation, reincorporation or reconstitution”). It also, uncharacteristically, deletes the text “by operation of law or pursuant to an agreement reasonably satisfactory to the other party to this Agreement”. This removes an unnecessary restriction on the foregoing event (the surviving entity failing to assume all the obligations under the ISDA) so makes sense: the squad here is just correcting its own verbal profligacy.