Template:M comp disc 2018 CSD 1(a): Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[1(a) - IM CSD Provision|If]] sparse, ''staccato''-style drafting is your kind of thing — it is mine — it is never an encouraging sign when the first words in an agreement are | [[1(a) - IM CSD Provision|If]] sparse, ''staccato''-style drafting is your kind of thing — it is mine — it is never an encouraging sign when the first words in an agreement are “Unless otherwise defined in this Deed”. | ||
In the 2018, there is a pitifully specific articulation of something that | Here, we think, this leaden [[proviso]] is to account for the [[tedious]] fact that a [[credit support deed|credit support ''deed'']] is not a mere ''appendage'' to the {{isdama}}, but its own independent legal construct, able to stand on its own two feet and makes its own way in the world, not tied to the apron strings of mother ISDA, whereas a [[credit support annex]] is forever a part of the {{isdama}} with no [[ontological]] existence without it. So, that “defined terms in the ISDA apply here” follows as a matter of logic for an annex, but not a self-supporting, suffrage-enjoying, deed of the realm, even if it does — or should — go without saying. | ||
In the 2018, there is a pitifully specific articulation of something else that should, but alas does not, go without saying, but it manages to refrain from explaining what it means by “transfer” — a pledge, of course, not really ''being'' a transfer. | |||
Revision as of 15:42, 5 March 2021
If sparse, staccato-style drafting is your kind of thing — it is mine — it is never an encouraging sign when the first words in an agreement are “Unless otherwise defined in this Deed”.
Here, we think, this leaden proviso is to account for the tedious fact that a credit support deed is not a mere appendage to the ISDA Master Agreement, but its own independent legal construct, able to stand on its own two feet and makes its own way in the world, not tied to the apron strings of mother ISDA, whereas a credit support annex is forever a part of the ISDA Master Agreement with no ontological existence without it. So, that “defined terms in the ISDA apply here” follows as a matter of logic for an annex, but not a self-supporting, suffrage-enjoying, deed of the realm, even if it does — or should — go without saying.
In the 2018, there is a pitifully specific articulation of something else that should, but alas does not, go without saying, but it manages to refrain from explaining what it means by “transfer” — a pledge, of course, not really being a transfer.