|
|
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{manual|MI|2002|5(b)(ii)|Section|5(b)(ii)|medium}} | | {{newisdamanual|Force Majeure}} |
| {{ISDAnumberingdiscrepancy}}
| |
| for the last word on [[force majeure]], the [[JC]]’s [[ultimate force majeure clause]] is where it's at.
| |
| | |
| Note that, while the {{1992ma}} does not contain the concept of [[force majeure]], there is an [[ISDA Illegality/Force Majeure Protocol]] (see [http://www.isda.org/2012illegalityprot/docs/ISDA_Protocol_-_Adoption_of_2002_Illegality_FM_provisions_Final.pdf here]) which can be signed to adopt/incorporate the relevant parts:
| |
| | |
| ===Section {{isdaprov|5(b)(ii)}} in the {{1992ma}}===
| |
| There is no equivalent to the {{isdaprov|Force Majeure Event}} in the {{1992ma}}. An {{isdaprov|Impossibility}} clause was frequently written into the schedule, which endeavoured to do the same thing. Note a few caveats with regard to Force Majeure Events:
| |
| *'''{{isdaprov|Hierarchy of Events}}''': {{ISDA Hierarchy of Events}}
| |
| *'''{{isdaprov|Deferral of Payments and Deliveries During Waiting Period}}''': {{ISDA Deferral of Payments and Deliveries}}
| |
| ==={{isdaprov|Waiting Period}}===
| |
| {{ISDA Waiting Period}}
| |
| | |
| ===Incorporating Force Majeure into the {{1992ma}}===
| |
| One can incorporate {{isdaprov|Force Majeure}} into the {{1992ma}} as long as you carry the concept through to its logical conclusion i.e.:
| |
| *Include a {{isdaprov|Hierachy of Events}};
| |
| *Consider the impact re a deferral of {{isdaprov|Early Termination Amount}} etc.
| |
| The concept also impacts the basis of [[Close Out]] because the {{2002ma}} requires use of true mids for valuation i.e, not the mean of each party's view of the bid/offer where a {{isdaprov|Force Majeure Event}} (or {{isdaprov|Illegality}}) occurs, which is effectively what you get under the {{1992ma}} with a “Two {{isdaprov|Affected Parties}}” option.
| |
| | |
| {{isdaanatomy}}
| |