Interpretation - CSA Provision

Revision as of 14:43, 30 December 2019 by Amwelladmin (talk | contribs)
ISDA 1995 English Law Credit Support Annex


In a Nutshell Section 1:

1 Interpretation
Capitalised terms not otherwise defined are defined in Paragraph 10. This Annex prevails over the Schedule, and Paragraph 11 prevails over the rest of this Annex. “Transfer” means, for cash, payment and, otherwise, delivery.
view template

1995 CSA full text of Section 1:

Paragraph 1. Interpretation
Capitalised terms not otherwise defined in this Annex or elsewhere in this Agreement have the meanings specified pursuant to Paragraph 10, and all references in this Annex to Paragraphs are to Paragraphs of this Annex. In the event of any inconsistency between this Annex and the other provisions of this Schedule, this Annex will prevail, and in the event of any inconsistency between Paragraph 11 and the other provisions of this Annex, Paragraph 11 will prevail. For the avoidance of doubt, references to “transfer” in this Annex mean, in relation to cash, payment and, in relation to other assets, delivery.
view template

Related Agreements
Click here for the text of Section 1 in the 1995 English Law CSA
Click here for the text of Section 1 in the 2016 English Law VM CSA
Click [[{{{3}}} - NY VM CSA Provision|here]] for the text of the equivalent, Section [[{{{3}}} - NY VM CSA Provision|{{{3}}}]] in the 2016 NY Law VM CSA
Comparisons
1995 CSA and 2016 VM CSA: click for comparison
{{nycsadiff {{{3}}}}}

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

1995 CSA and 2016 VM CSA: click for comparison Nomenclature: Being an annex to an ISDA Master Agreement, references to the “Agreement” means that particular ISDA Master Agreement; the “Annex” is the CSA and, if you were pedantic enough that you really felt the need to refer to it, the “Schedule” is the schedule to the ISDA Master Agreement.

Covered Transactions as a concept only arrives in the 2016 VM CSA. Until then, the neatest way of describing whether a given set of Transactions are covered or not is to say something like: “ [SPECIFY] Transactions will [not] be relevant for purposes of determining ““Exposure”” under the 1995 CSA. ”