Good Faith and Commercially Reasonable Manner - CSA Provision: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{csaanat|9(b)|1995}} | ||
Whether a merchant should commit himself to dealing in [[good faith]], or in a [[commercially reasonable manner]], is one that vexes a surprising number of attorneys. Especially American ones. The only discomfort it should occasion is to a solicitor’s livelihood, for this magic expression, while doing no more than articulating the basic commercial outlook of a [[good egg]], puts many a tedious negotiation to the sword. Everyone benefits but the officers of Her Majesty's courts. | Whether a merchant should commit himself to dealing in [[good faith]], or in a [[commercially reasonable manner]], is one that vexes a surprising number of attorneys. Especially American ones. The only discomfort it should occasion is to a solicitor’s livelihood, for this magic expression, while doing no more than articulating the basic commercial outlook of a [[good egg]], puts many a tedious negotiation to the sword. Everyone benefits but the officers of Her Majesty's courts. | ||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
And for you Americans, for whom {{casenote|Barclays|Unicredit}} is of persuasive value only, there is the fact that this standard is written into the [[Uniform Commercial Code]]. and the {{1994csa}}. | And for you Americans, for whom {{casenote|Barclays|Unicredit}} is of persuasive value only, there is the fact that this standard is written into the [[Uniform Commercial Code]]. and the {{1994csa}}. | ||
{{sa}} | |||
*[[Good faith]] | *[[Good faith]] | ||
*[[Commercially reasonable manner]] | *[[Commercially reasonable manner]] | ||
*{{casenote|Barclays|Unicredit}} | *{{casenote|Barclays|Unicredit}} |
Revision as of 00:48, 4 January 2020
ISDA 1995 English Law Credit Support Annex
|
Whether a merchant should commit himself to dealing in good faith, or in a commercially reasonable manner, is one that vexes a surprising number of attorneys. Especially American ones. The only discomfort it should occasion is to a solicitor’s livelihood, for this magic expression, while doing no more than articulating the basic commercial outlook of a good egg, puts many a tedious negotiation to the sword. Everyone benefits but the officers of Her Majesty's courts.
A contract is a bond of trust. How would a merchant explain to his counterparty that he wished to reserve for himself the right to act in bad faith?
As for commercial reasonableness, and that objection I can already see you formulating that it admits shades of doubt, and encourages litigation - well, the great case of Barclays v Unicredit should be a source of great succour to you.
And for you Americans, for whom Barclays v Unicredit is of persuasive value only, there is the fact that this standard is written into the Uniform Commercial Code. and the 1994 NY CSA.