Template:M summ EUA Annex Unauthorised Transfers: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Unauthorised Transfer - Emissions Annex Provision|This]] is the {{icds}}’s round about way of saying the {{euaprov|Allowances}} you have been delivered, good sir, are ''hot''. Nicked. Half-inched. Fell off the back of an electric truck. ''Stolen'' | [[Unauthorised Transfer - Emissions Annex Provision|This]] is the {{icds}}’s round about way of saying the {{euaprov|Allowances}} you have been delivered, good sir, are ''hot''. Nicked. Half-inched. Fell off the back of an electric truck. ''Stolen''. | ||
If they are nicked then the No Encumbrances representation which accompanied their delivery to you has turned out to be false, and there are unwind consequences. | Once this regrettable state of affairs has been confirmed by an {{euaprov|Appropriate Source}}, your {{euaprov|Allowances}} become “{{euaprov|Affected Allowances}}”, and the poor sap from whom they were stolen, becomes an {{euaprov|Original Affected Party}}. | ||
If they are nicked then the {{euaprov|No Encumbrances}} representation which accompanied their delivery to you has turned out to be false, and there are unwind consequences. | |||
It’s all so ''bloodless'', isn’t it. | It’s all so ''bloodless'', isn’t it. | ||
Revision as of 12:49, 25 January 2023
This is the ISDA’s crack drafting squad™’s round about way of saying the Allowances you have been delivered, good sir, are hot. Nicked. Half-inched. Fell off the back of an electric truck. Stolen.
Once this regrettable state of affairs has been confirmed by an Appropriate Source, your Allowances become “Affected Allowances”, and the poor sap from whom they were stolen, becomes an Original Affected Party.
If they are nicked then the No Encumbrances representation which accompanied their delivery to you has turned out to be false, and there are unwind consequences.
It’s all so bloodless, isn’t it.
Note, though: There is much talk (especially in the trade financings and SPV world, where carry trades are popular — about allowances that are due to be delivered being nicked before they can be delivered. This wording does not cater for that. Nor should it, in the theoretical derivativesy world in which we live, where a Delivering Party’s obligation is not to deliver these Allowances in this account, or those Allowances in that account, but just Allowances, in the abstract, and if the Allowances in the Specified Holding Account I was going to deliver to you got nicked while I wasn’t looking that is not a problem for the Transaction, or for innocent old you, but for stupid old me.
I have to go and get some more Allowances from somewhere, or suffer the ignominy of a Failure to Pay or Deliver.