From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| ===Section {{isdaprov|9(e)(i)}} '''[[Counterpart]]s'''===
| | {{isda 9(3) summ|isdaprov}} |
| There is an impassioned essay about the idiocy of [[counterparts]] clauses elsewhere<ref>In the [[counterparts]] article, as a matter of fact.</ref>.
| |
| ===Section {{isdaprov|9(e)(ii)}} {{isdaprov|Confirmation}}s''' ===
| |
| {{trade versus confirmation}}
| |
| | |
| Note also the addition of [[e-mail]] as a means of communication to the 2002 version ([[email]] not really having been a “thing” in 1992). This caused all kinds of [[fear and loathing]] amongst the judiciary, when asked about it, as can be seen in the frightful case of {{casenote|Greenclose|National Westminster Bank plc}}.Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
| |
| | |
| ==== [[Timely confirmation]] regulations and deemed consent====
| |
| Both {{t|EMIR}} and [[Dodd Frank]] have [[timely confirmation]] requirements obliging parties to have confirmed their scratchy tape recordings within a short period (around 3 days). This fell out of a huge backlog in confirming structured [[credit derivatives]] trades following the Lehman collapse.
| |
Revision as of 16:20, 15 April 2020