Specified Indebtedness - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Of particular interest in the debate on {{isdaprov|Cross Default}}. Please refer to that section for a fuller discussion. see also the somewhat clumsier (but materially similar) definition of {{efetprov|Specified Indebtedness}} in the {{efetma}}. | Of particular interest in the debate on {{isdaprov|Cross Default}}. Please refer to that section for a fuller discussion. see also the somewhat clumsier (but materially similar) definition of {{efetprov|Specified Indebtedness}} in the {{efetma}}. | ||
{{seealso}} | |||
*{{isdaprov|Cross Default}} ({{isdama}}) | |||
*[[cross default]] (generally) |
Revision as of 09:45, 11 April 2017
A simple and innocuous enough looking provision. Ahh, but what to make of the definition of borrowed money? Could it include repo? (No, according to Simon Firth - see here)
Of particular interest in the debate on Cross Default. Please refer to that section for a fuller discussion. see also the somewhat clumsier (but materially similar) definition of Specified Indebtedness in the EFET Master Agreement.
See also
- Cross Default (ISDA Master Agreement)
- cross default (generally)