Change in Law - Equity Derivatives Provision: Difference between revisions

Line 6: Line 6:
The industry has generally moved to omit the “{{eqderivprov|Increased Cost of Hedging}}” aspects of this definition (because it is dealt with there).  
The industry has generally moved to omit the “{{eqderivprov|Increased Cost of Hedging}}” aspects of this definition (because it is dealt with there).  


But, if you were splitting hairs about it, you might say that not all “materially increased” costs a party may incur “in performing its obligations under such Transaction” will necessarily relate to hedging, so a {{gmslaprov|Hedging Party}} (and, when it comes to it, a ''non-{{isdaprov|Hedging Party}}'') should stand its ground on omitting “[[Prong Y]]”.  
But, if you were splitting hairs about it, you might say that not all “materially increased” costs a party may incur “in performing its obligations under such Transaction” will necessarily relate to hedging, so a {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}} (and, when it comes to it, a ''non-{{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}}'') should stand its ground on omitting “[[Prong Y]]”.  


Those who do not have the stomach for this fight may see this expressed as: "Applicable, provided that Section {{eqderivprov|12.9(a)(ii)(Y)}} of the {{eqderivprov|Equity Definitions}} does not apply."  
Those who do not have the stomach for this fight may see this expressed as: "Applicable, provided that Section {{eqderivprov|12.9(a)(ii)(Y)}} of the {{eqderivprov|Equity Definitions}} does not apply."