Template:Isda 5(a)(v) comp: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "*'''{{isdaprov|Default under Specified Transaction}}''': {{isdaprov|DUST}} was expanded in five significant ways: *Defaults require the acceleration of just ''the'' {{isd..."
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
*'''{{isdaprov|Default under Specified Transaction}}''': {{isdaprov|DUST}} was expanded in five significant ways:  
{{isdaprov|DUST}} has been expanded in five significant ways by the {{2002ma}}:  
*Defaults require the [[acceleration]] of just ''the'' {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}} in question (for ''general'' defaults) but off ''all'' outstanding transactions under the relevant [[master agreement]] (for ''[[delivery]]'' defaults). This change was made with [[repo]]s and [[stock loan]]s in mind where delivery failures under are common and do not of themselves indicate weakness in the {{isdaprov|Defaulting Party}}’s creditworthiness.  
*Defaults require the [[acceleration]] of just ''the'' {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}} in question (for ''general'' defaults) but off ''all'' outstanding transactions under the relevant [[master agreement]] (for ''[[delivery]]'' defaults). This change was made with [[repo]]s and [[stock loan]]s in mind where delivery failures under are common and do not of themselves indicate weakness in the {{isdaprov|Defaulting Party}}’s creditworthiness.  
*{{isdaprov|DUST}} under the {{2002ma}} can be triggered by default under a [[credit support arrangement]] relating to a {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}}. These weren’t included for the {{1992isda}} {{isda92prov|DUST}}.  
*{{isdaprov|DUST}} under the {{2002ma}} can be triggered by default under a [[credit support arrangement]] relating to a {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}}. These weren’t included for the {{1992isda}} {{isda92prov|DUST}}.  

Revision as of 10:48, 24 September 2020

DUST has been expanded in five significant ways by the 2002 ISDA:

  • The phrase “or challenges the validity of” was added after “disaffirms, disclaims, repudiates or rejects” to reduce ambiguity as to whether a party’s action constitutes a repudiation; and
  • A Non-Defaulting Party must have evidence of the repudiation that is executed and delivered by the repudiating entity;
  • The “Specified Transaction” concept has been broadened to include additional Transaction types such as repos, and to include a catchall clause designed to include any future derivative products that have not been thought of yet.