Absence of Litigation - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:
But if you do see your life stretching away unendingly to the horizon, and you haven’t got anything else in the calendar in the next half hour, go west, young man. If you can’t  try this:
But if you do see your life stretching away unendingly to the horizon, and you haven’t got anything else in the calendar in the next half hour, go west, young man. If you can’t  try this:


[[Absence of litigation]] seeks to address litigation carrying two particular risks:
===[[Absence of litigation]] generally===
 
An [[absence of litigation]] representation seeks to address litigation carrying two particular risks:
*'''Enforceability''': Litigation that could somehow undermine or prejudice the enforceability of the agreement you are presently negotiating;
*'''Enforceability''': Litigation that could somehow undermine or prejudice the enforceability of the agreement you are presently negotiating;
*'''Credit deterioration''': Litigation that is so monstrous that it could basically put your counterparty out of business altogether, with amounts still owing to you under the agreement you’re negotiating.
*'''Credit deterioration''': Litigation that is so monstrous that it could basically put your counterparty out of business altogether, with amounts still owing to you under the agreement you’re negotiating.


===Enforceability-threatening litigation===
====Enforceability-threatening litigation====
Firstly, Earth to Planet ISDA: what kind of {{tag|litigation}} or regulatory action — we presume about something unrelated to this agreement since, by your theory, ''it doesn’t damn well exist yet'' — could adversely impact in the ''enforceability'' of this future private legal {{t|contract}} between one of the litigants and an unrelated, and ignorant, third party? Seach me.  
Firstly, Earth to Planet ISDA: what kind of {{tag|litigation}} or regulatory action — we presume about something unrelated to this agreement since, by your theory, ''it doesn’t damn well exist yet'' — could adversely impact in the ''enforceability'' of this future private legal {{t|contract}} between one of the litigants and an unrelated, and ignorant, third party? Seach me.