Termination Event - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) m Text replace - " "" to " “" |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{isdacomparison}} | {{isdacomparison}} | ||
{{fullanat2|isda|14 - Termination Event|2002|14 - Termination Event|1992}} | |||
{{ | =={{tag|A trick for young players}}== | ||
'''Best Practice''' Note: Therefore adding any new {{isdaprov|Termination Event}} must ALWAYS be achieved by labelling it a new “'''{{isdaprov|Additional Termination Event}}''' under Section {{isdaprov|5(b)(v)}}, and not a separate event under a new Section {{isdaprov|5(b)(vi)}} etc. If, instead of being expressed as an “{{isdaprov|Additional Termination Event}}”, which is how the ISDA Mechanism is intended to operate, it is set out as a new “5(b)(vi)” it is not designated therefore as any of an “{{isdaprov|Illegality}}”, “{{isdaprov|Tax Event}}”, “{{isdaprov|Tax Event Upon Merger}}”, “{{isdaprov|Credit Event Upon Merger}}” or “{{isdaprov|Additional Termination Event}}”, so therefore, read literally, is not caught by the definition of “{{isdaprov|Termination Event}}” and none of the Termination provisions bite on it. | |||
I mention this because we have seen it happen. You can take a “fair, large and liberal view" that what the parties intended was to create an {{isdaprov|ATE}}, but why suffer that anxiety? | |||
I mention this because we have seen it happen. You can take a “fair, large and liberal view" that what the parties intended was to create an ATE, but why suffer that anxiety? | |||
{{Isdaanatomy}} | {{Isdaanatomy}} | ||
*{{isdaprov|Additional Termination Event}} | *{{isdaprov|Additional Termination Event}} |