Template:Isda 3(d) summ: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 14: Line 14:
The other little fiddle — and it ''is'' a little fidgety fiddle — is to remark of annual reports that, yes, they ''are'' covered by that Section 3(d) representation, ''but'' with a [[proviso]]:
The other little fiddle — and it ''is'' a little fidgety fiddle — is to remark of annual reports that, yes, they ''are'' covered by that Section 3(d) representation, ''but'' with a [[proviso]]:
{{quote|“Yes; ''provided that'' the phrase “is, as of the date of the information, true, accurate and complete in every material respect” in Section {{{{{1}}}|3(d)}} shall be deleted and the phrase “fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations as of their respective dates and for the respective periods covered thereby” shall be inserted in lieu thereof.”}}
{{quote|“Yes; ''provided that'' the phrase “is, as of the date of the information, true, accurate and complete in every material respect” in Section {{{{{1}}}|3(d)}} shall be deleted and the phrase “fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations as of their respective dates and for the respective periods covered thereby” shall be inserted in lieu thereof.”}}
These are the only examples we could find before we got bored looking. In each case we are not persuaded these caveats accommodate anyone other than our value-adding learned friends:
====Legal opinions====
We suppose this is excluded because the Party to the ISDA is not the author of the legal opinion, nor professionally competent to pass on its contents (hence the need for the legal opinion in the first place), so should hardly be expected to be held to account should it turn out to be wrong.
But this, we submit, is to misunderstand in a profound way the point of a legal contract. Unlike criminal or even tort law, the law of contract is not an instrument of moral judgment. It cares only about economics: that one does, or does not, do what one has promised or — as in this case — that what one has represented to you is, or is not, true. The law of contract is broadly incurious about ''why''.
The object of a legal opinion is to confirm the accuracy of a legal representation. Instead of simply representing that, for example, you have the regulatory permission to act as a swap dealer, you have a legal opinion to confirms that fact, from one who should know.  If what that that legal opinion says is not true — if that one who ''should'' know in fact does not — then regardless of whose fault this is, or how egregious has been her negligence in being at fault, the regulatory permission required does not obtain, and the comfort your counterparty seeks from that legal opinion is misplaced. The representation is false, and the counterparty should be allowed out as a result.
====Credit Support documents====
====Annual reports====
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Template:Isda_3(d)_summ"