Breach of Agreement - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(18 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{fullanat2|isda|5(a)(ii)|2002|5(a)(ii)|1992}}
{{newisdamanual|5(a)(ii)}}
{{nuts|ISDA|Breach of Agreement}}
A failure to perform any agreement, if not cured withint 30 days, is an Event of Default, except for (I) those failures who have their own special {{isdaprov|Event of Default}} (ie {{isdaprov|Failure to Pay or Deliver}}, under Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(i)}}) or those that relate to tax, and which mean the party not complying will just get clipped for tax it rather would not.
 
A failure to {{isdaprov|Furnish Specified Information}} — ie those documents for delivery specified in {{isdaprov|Part 3}} of the {{isdama}} , adverted to in Section {{isdaprov|4(a)(ii)}} ''will'' therefore be an {{isdaprov|Event of Default}}, although you have to navigate a needlessly tortured string of clause cross references and [[double negative|double negatives]] to settle upon this conclusion.
===Differences====
Note the addition of repudiation to the {{2002ma}}.
{{seealso}}
*{{isdaprov|Furnish Specified Information}} and sub-limbs {{isdaprov|4(a)(i)}} and {{isdaprov|4(a)(iii)}} of that definition. But ''not'' {{isdaprov|4(a)(ii)}}.
*Section {{isdaprov|3(d)}} representations.