Template:Isda Affiliate summ: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{{{{1}}}|Affiliate}} is potentially wide: it could capture, for example, [[special purpose vehicle]]s whose shareholding is owned by the same corporate service provider, or separate stand-alone hedge funds managed by the same administrator or [[investment manager]].
{{affiliate capsule}}
{{affiliate capsule}}

Latest revision as of 08:52, 23 August 2024

{{{{{1}}}|Affiliate}} is potentially wide: it could capture, for example, special purpose vehicles whose shareholding is owned by the same corporate service provider, or separate stand-alone hedge funds managed by the same administrator or investment manager.

An “affiliate” is really not a complicated idea in the abstract, yet in the world of commercial contracts, our learned friends rejoice in overdetermining it all the same. For these men and women, a “affiliate” of an undertaking could be:

  • Parent: its parent or holding company, which holds all or a majority of its ordinary share capital — often abbreviated as a “holdco”
  • Child: its subsidiary — a company the ordinary share capital of which it holds all or a majority
  • Sibling: a company in common ownership with the corporate being; that is to say, a company that shares the same parent or holding company.

And that is about it. Pedants will be anxious to point out that, shares being the divisible ownership units that they are, and different degrees of control and voting rights attaching to different classes of share, there are degrees of ownership, and affiliation, and some imply more connectedness than others. Any confusion is usually resolved by pointing at the definition of “subsidiary” and “holding company” in the Companies Act, or similar legislation in a jurisdiction near you. The ISDA Master Agreement does a reasonably neat job of capturing the above by reference to the majority of voting control.