Template:2(a)(iii): Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
===Section 2(a)(iii) litigation===
===Section 2(a)(iii) litigation===
This is one of the handful of important authorities on the effect of the suspension of obligations under Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}} of the {{isdama}}, and whether [[flawed asset]] provision amounts to an [[ipso facto]] clause under the [[US Bankruptcy Code]] or a violation of the [[anti-deprivation]] principle under English law.
There is a (generous) handful of important authorities on the effect under [[English law]] or [[New York law]] of the suspension of obligations under Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}} of the {{isdama}}, and whether [[flawed asset]] provision amounts to an “[[ipso facto]] clause” under the [[US Bankruptcy Code]] or violates the “[[anti-deprivation]]” principle under [[English law]]. Those cases are:


===Resources===
===Resources===
Line 9: Line 9:
*{{casenote|Enron|TXU}}
*{{casenote|Enron|TXU}}
*{{casenote|Metavante|Lehman}}
*{{casenote|Metavante|Lehman}}
===See also===
*[[ISDA Anatomy]]

Revision as of 07:32, 30 January 2020

Section 2(a)(iii) litigation

There is a (generous) handful of important authorities on the effect under English law or New York law of the suspension of obligations under Section 2(a)(iii) of the ISDA Master Agreement, and whether flawed asset provision amounts to an “ipso facto clause” under the US Bankruptcy Code or violates the “anti-deprivation” principle under English law. Those cases are:

Resources

Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Template:2(a)(iii)&oldid=39675"