From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
|
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{isdaanat|5(a)(iv)}} | | {{newisdamanual|5(a)(iv)}} |
| What is a “[[material]]” respect? This is key, since some of the general representations ({{isdaprov|Consents}}, for example) are quite wide, and in this world of regulatory perma-change, the risk that one is, for example, outside technical compliance with a new regulation as it is implemented, notwithstanding a competent [[regulator]]’s informal indication that no action will be taken if you get your skates on and remediate quickly — it happened for {{t|MiFID II}} as thousands of financial firms raced headlong at the brick wall of that 3 January 2017 implementation date<ref>[[Swiss stay]] too, for that matter.</ref> but it seems reasonable to suppose that materially must somehow impact your ability to carry out your obligations under a Transaction or the {{isdama}}<ref>Other than the representation itself, of course. That would be meta, and actually a bit of a [[strange loop]].</ref>.
| |
| {{sa}}
| |
| *{{isdaprov|Consents}}
| |
| {{ref}}
| |
Revision as of 21:44, 30 December 2023