Template:M comp disc EUA Annex (d)(i)(4): Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "In a nutshell what is going on here is: *When you thought you were going to settle, you can’t — where it isn’t ''your'' fault (that’s a {{euaprov|Failure to Deliver}})..."
 
No edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
In a nutshell what is going on here is:
[[(d)(i)(4) - Emissions Annex Provision|In]] a {{nutshell}} what is going on here is:
*When you thought you were going to settle, you can’t — where it isn’t ''your'' fault (that’s a {{euaprov|Failure to Deliver}}) and it isn’t the [[European Union]]’s fault either (that’s a {{euaprov|Suspension Event}})
*When you thought you were going to settle, you can’t — where it isn’t ''your'' fault (that’s a {{euaprov|Failure to Deliver}}) and it isn’t the [[European Union]]’s fault either (that’s a {{euaprov|Suspension Event}})
*The parties’ respective settlement obligations are suspended until resolution, and (unless things don’t resolve for an unfeasibly long time) then performed within two business days of the settlement Disruption Event lifting;
*The parties’ respective settlement obligations are suspended until resolution, and (unless things don’t resolve for an unfeasibly long time) then performed within two business days of the settlement Disruption Event lifting;
*If they don’t lift by the earliest of (i) 9 {{euaprov|Delivery Business Days}} following scheduled settlement or (ii) the next {{euaprov|Reconciliation Deadline}} by which the EUAs have to be surrendered or (iii) 3 {{euaprov|Delivery Business Days}} before the next {{euaprov|End of Phase Reconciliation Deadline}}, then it is deemed to be an {{isdaprov|Illegality}}.
*If they don’t lift by the earliest of (i) 9 {{euaprov|Delivery Business Days}} following scheduled settlement or (ii) the next {{euaprov|Reconciliation Deadline}} by which the EUAs have to be surrendered or (iii) 3 {{euaprov|Delivery Business Days}} before the next {{euaprov|End of Phase Reconciliation Deadline}}, then it is deemed to be an {{isdaprov|Illegality}}.
*If there is an {{euaprov|Early Termination Date}}<ref>Which there ''should'' be... but who knows, maybe a man from mars will come down and start eating up bars in the mean time.</ref> then if “{{euaprov|Payment for Termination on Settlement Disruption}}” applies, you determine the {{euaprov|Early Termination Amount}} assuming the suspended obligations resume on the {{euaprov|Early Termination Date}}, and if it doesn’t, that’s all she wrote.
*If there is an {{isdaprov|Early Termination Date}}<ref>Which there ''should'' be... but who knows, maybe a man from mars will come down and start eating up bars in the mean time.</ref> then if “{{euaprov|Payment on Termination for Settlement Disruption}}” applies, you determine the {{isdaprov|Early Termination Amount}} assuming the suspended obligations resume on the {{isdaprov|Early Termination Date}}, and if it doesn’t, that’s all she wrote.
 
But note: no extra {{euaprov|Cost of Carry Amount}} factored in here, as there is for a {{euaprov|Suspension Event}}. Why? ''Cherchez moi''. If you find out, let me know.

Latest revision as of 14:49, 26 July 2022

In a Nutshell what is going on here is:

But note: no extra Cost of Carry Amount factored in here, as there is for a Suspension Event. Why? Cherchez moi. If you find out, let me know.

  1. Which there should be... but who knows, maybe a man from mars will come down and start eating up bars in the mean time.