Template:Isda Automatic Early Termination comp: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "{{isda 6(a) comp|{{{1}}}}}" |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (16 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{isdacomparisons|83262|40195|40196}} | ||
{{drop|A|utomatic Early Termination}} first appeared as a ''named'' term in the {{1992ma}}. It did feature, uncredited, in the {{1987ma}}, though in this larval stage it was a blunt instrument indeed. | |||
By 1992, the [[’squad]] had made some key adjustments: | |||
{{gb|They made it an option you could elect in the Schedule, and typically only would elect against counterparties in one of the few jurisdictions where the local [[netting opinion]] required it.<li> | |||
They narrowed down its scope, by excluding from its ambit limbs (2) ([[cashflow insolvency]]) and (7) (contractual sequestration) of the {{{{{1}}}|Bankruptcy}} definition.<li> | |||
They also officially labelled it “{{{{{1}}}|Automatic Early Termination}}”.}} | |||
Thereafter they did not change the language of {{{{{1}}}|6(a)}} between the {{1992ma}} and the {{2002ma}}, though there ''was'' an adjustment to the definition of what counted as a “{{{{{1}}}|bankruptcy petition}}” under Section {{{{{1}}}|5(a)(vii)(4)}} of the {{{{{1}}}|Bankruptcy}} definition, to narrow down the applicability of the problematic [[grace period]]. Problematic for reasons we discuss at length in the premium section (see {{pjchotlink|Formal bankruptcy petitions and grace periods}}). | |||
Latest revision as of 09:23, 12 October 2024
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
Automatic Early Termination first appeared as a named term in the 1992 ISDA. It did feature, uncredited, in the 1987 ISDA, though in this larval stage it was a blunt instrument indeed.
By 1992, the ’squad had made some key adjustments:
- They made it an option you could elect in the Schedule, and typically only would elect against counterparties in one of the few jurisdictions where the local netting opinion required it.
- They narrowed down its scope, by excluding from its ambit limbs (2) (cashflow insolvency) and (7) (contractual sequestration) of the {{{{{1}}}|Bankruptcy}} definition.
- They also officially labelled it “{{{{{1}}}|Automatic Early Termination}}”.
Thereafter they did not change the language of {{{{{1}}}|6(a)}} between the 1992 ISDA and the 2002 ISDA, though there was an adjustment to the definition of what counted as a “{{{{{1}}}|bankruptcy petition}}” under Section {{{{{1}}}|5(a)(vii)(4)}} of the {{{{{1}}}|Bankruptcy}} definition, to narrow down the applicability of the problematic grace period. Problematic for reasons we discuss at length in the premium section (see Formal bankruptcy petitions and grace periods).