Pre-Estimate - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{isdaanat|6(e)(v)}} | {{isdaanat|6(e)(v)}} | ||
From [[the lady doth protest too much]] school of contractual drafting, a neat and theoretically vacuous attempt to ensure that Early Terminaiton Amounts determined under an ISDA are not seen as (unenforceable) penalty clause, but rather a [[liquidated damages ]] clause — i.e., a “genuine pre-estimate of loss” caused by a breach of contract, as enunciated by Lord Dunedin in that famous contract case on penalty clauses, {{casenote|Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd|New Garage & Motor Co Ltd}}. | |||
But it either is or it isn't. As it happens, it probably is a liquidated damages clause, but the parties agreeing in a standard form that it is one doesn't really help that analysis. |
Revision as of 09:55, 18 April 2018
ISDA Anatomy™
view template
view template
|
From the lady doth protest too much school of contractual drafting, a neat and theoretically vacuous attempt to ensure that Early Terminaiton Amounts determined under an ISDA are not seen as (unenforceable) penalty clause, but rather a liquidated damages clause — i.e., a “genuine pre-estimate of loss” caused by a breach of contract, as enunciated by Lord Dunedin in that famous contract case on penalty clauses, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage & Motor Co Ltd.
But it either is or it isn't. As it happens, it probably is a liquidated damages clause, but the parties agreeing in a standard form that it is one doesn't really help that analysis.