Breach of Agreement - 1992 ISDA Provision
1992 ISDA Master Agreement
Section 5(a)(ii) in a Nutshell™ Use at your own risk, campers!
Full text of Section 5(a)(ii)
Related agreements and comparisons
|
Content and comparisons
Note the addition of Repudiation of Agreement to the 2002 ISDA. Common law purists like the JC will grumble that you don’t really need to set out repudiation as a breach justifying termination of a contract, because that’s what it is by definition but stating the bleeding obvious has never stopped ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ before.
Summary
A failure to perform any agreement, if not cured within 30 days, is an Event of Default, except for:
- (i) those failures which already have their own special Event of Default (i.e., Failure to Pay or Deliver under Section 5(a)(i)) or
- (ii) those that relate to tax, and which mean the party not complying will just get clipped for tax it rather would not.
These are the boring breaches of agreement: those of a not immediately existential consequence to a derivative relationship (like Failure to Pay or Deliver, or a party’s outright Bankruptcy) but which, if not promptly sorted out, justify shutting things down with extreme prejudice.
All rendered in ISDA’s crack drafting squad™’s lovingly tortured prose, of course: note a double negative extragvaganza in 5(a)(ii): not complying with an obligation that is not (inter alia) a payment obligation if not remedied within a month. High five, team ISDA.
See also
Template:M sa 1992 ISDA 5(a)(ii)