Template:Isda Specified Entity summ

{{{{{1}}}|Specified Entity}} is so (~ cough ~) important that it is literally the first thing you see when you regard an ISDA {{{{{1}}}|Schedule}}.

Painstakingly set out, separately for {{{{{1}}}|Events of Default}} (namely {{{{{1}}}|DUST}} (Section {{{{{1}}}|5(a)(v)}}), {{{{{1}}}|Cross Default}} (Section {{{{{1}}}|5(a)(vi)}}) and {{{{{1}}}|Bankruptcy}} (Section {{{{{1}}}|5(a)(vii)}}) and the one {{{{{1}}}|Termination Event}} (Credit Event Upon Merger (Section {{{{{1}}}|5(b)(v)}} — as if you would want different Affiliates to trigger this event depending on precisely how they cork-screwed into the side of a hill), and jointly for the “{{{{{1}}}|Absence of Litigation}}” representation in Section {{{{{1}}}|3(c)}} of the 2002 ISDA.

A {{{{{1}}}|Specified Entity}} is any affiliate (or, in theory at any rate, even a non-affiliate, if your risk officer is a total cretin) of a counterparty to an ISDA Master Agreement which is designated in the relevant Schedule.

It is relevant to the definition of {{{{{1}}}|Cross Default}} and {{{{{1}}}|Default under Specified Transaction}} in that it widens the effect of those provisions to include defaults by the parties specified.

Nominating {{{{{1}}}|Specified Entities}} for yourself has its upsides

{{{{{1}}}|Specified Entity}} widens the scope of those provisions also to include defaults by the other side (and its {{{{{1}}}|Specified Entities}}) under their contracts with your {{{{{1}}}|Specified Entities}} — so there is some benefit to naming your affiliates, friends and relations as {{{{{1}}}|Specified Entities}}. But given how unlikely you are to be actually monitoring how a counterparty performs with an affiliate, it’s more of a false comfort than a real one.