Amendments - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{fullanat2|isda|9(b)|2002|9(b)|1992}}
{{isdaanat|9(b)}}
To lookouts here. One: according to her majesty’s judiciary, [[email]] ''does not count as an [[electronic messaging system]]''. Let your klaxons blare. It seems absurd at first glance — [[some|Jolly Contrarian]] would say it seems absurd having read the whole judgment in {{Casenote|Greenclose|National Westminster Bank plc}} — but there it is: that is the law of the land at the time of writing.
 
This might not so much matter were it not for the second point. In another spectacular outing for her majesty's judiciary<ref>{{casenote|Rock Advertising Limited|MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited}}</ref>, they recently found that a “[[no oral modification]]” clause is effective in law. This probably makes sense if you are sitting in a law library, or judicial chambers, contemplating the eternal verities, but it makes none if you are managing the cut and thrust of daily contract management. That said, most financial institutions have an industrial complex covering the negotiation of {{isdama}}s and other trading contracts, so a formal amendment is not likely to pass with copperplate script execution. But [[waiver|waivers]] — especially when your [[credit department]] is in the thrall of setting [[NAV trigger|NAV triggers]] it doesn’t monitor and isn’t likely to to exercise — are a different story.
 
Waivers are a pain in the posterior.
 
{{Seealso}}
*{{Casenote|Greenclose|National Westminster Bank plc}}, on whether email is an electronic messaging system;
*{{casenote|Rock Advertising Limited|MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited}} on whether one can [[orally]] [[amend]] a contract with a “[[no oral modification]]” clause

Revision as of 08:39, 8 August 2018

ISDA Anatomy™


In a Nutshell Section 9(b):

9(b) Amendments. An amendment of, or waiver given under, this Agreement will only be effective if in writing and executed by each of the parties otherwise suitably electronically confirmed.
view template

2002 ISDA full text of Section 9(b):

9(b) Amendments. An amendment, modification or waiver in respect of this Agreement will only be effective if in writing (including a writing evidenced by a facsimile transmission) and executed by each of the parties or confirmed by an exchange of telexes or by an exchange of electronic messages on an electronic messaging system.
view template

Click here for the text of Section 9(b) in the 1992 ISDA

Index: Click to expand:Navigation
See ISDA Comparison for a comparison between the 1992 ISDA and the 2002 ISDA.
The Varieties of ISDA Experience
Subject 2002 (wikitext) 1992 (wikitext) 1987 (wikitext)
Preamble Pre Pre Pre
Interpretation 1 1 1
Obligns/Payment 2 2 2
Representations 3 3 3
Agreements 4 4 4
EODs & Term Events 5 Events of Default: FTPDBreachCSDMisrepDUSTCross DefaultBankruptcyMWA Termination Events: IllegalityFMTax EventTEUMCEUMATE 5 Events of Default: FTPDBreachCSDMisrepDUSTCross DefaultBankruptcyMWA Termination Events: IllegalityTax EventTEUMCEUMATE 5 Events of Default: FTPDBreachCSDMisrepDUSSCross DefaultBankruptcyMWA Termination Events: IllegalityTax EventTEUMCEUM
Early Termination 6 Early Termination: ET right on EODET right on TEEffect of DesignationCalculations; Payment DatePayments on ETSet-off 6 Early Termination: ET right on EODET right on TEEffect of DesignationCalculationsPayments on ETSet-off 6 Early Termination: ET right on EODET right on TEEffect of DesignationCalculationsPayments on ET
Transfer 7 7 7
Contractual Currency 8 8 8
Miscellaneous 9 9 9
Offices; Multibranch Parties 10 10 10
Expenses 11 11 11
Notices 12 12 12
Governing Law 13 13 13
Definitions 14 14 14
Schedule Schedule Schedule Schedule
Termination Provisions Part 1 Part 1 Part 1
Tax Representations Part 2 Part 2 Part 2
Documents for Delivery Part 3 Part 3 Part 3
Miscellaneous Part 4 Part 4 Part 4
Other Provisions Part 5 Part 5 Part 5
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.


To lookouts here. One: according to her majesty’s judiciary, email does not count as an electronic messaging system. Let your klaxons blare. It seems absurd at first glance — Jolly Contrarian would say it seems absurd having read the whole judgment in Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc — but there it is: that is the law of the land at the time of writing.

This might not so much matter were it not for the second point. In another spectacular outing for her majesty's judiciary[1], they recently found that a “no oral modification” clause is effective in law. This probably makes sense if you are sitting in a law library, or judicial chambers, contemplating the eternal verities, but it makes none if you are managing the cut and thrust of daily contract management. That said, most financial institutions have an industrial complex covering the negotiation of ISDA Master Agreements and other trading contracts, so a formal amendment is not likely to pass with copperplate script execution. But waivers — especially when your credit department is in the thrall of setting NAV triggers it doesn’t monitor and isn’t likely to to exercise — are a different story.

Waivers are a pain in the posterior.

See also