Counterparts and Confirmations - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

Counterparts and Confirmations - ISDA Provision (view source)

1,117 bytes removed , 3 January

no edit summary

82,387

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{isdaanat|9(e)}}
+{{newisdamanual|9(e)}}
-===Section {{isdaprov|9(e)(ii)}} {{isdaprov|Confirmation}}s''' ===
-{{trade versus confirmation}}
-Note also the addition of [[e-mail]] as a means of communication to the 2002 version (email not really having been a “thing” in 1992). This caused all kinds of [[fear and loathing]] amongst the judiciary, when asked about it, as can be seen in the frightful case of {{casenote|Greenclose|National Westminster Bank plc}}.Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
-==== [[Timely confirmation]] regulations and deemed consent====
-Both {{t|EMIR}} and [[Dodd Frank]] have [[timely confirmation]] requirements obliging parties to have confirmed their scratchy tape recordings within a short period (around 3 days). This fell out of a huge backlog in confirming structured [[credit derivatives]] trades following the Lehman collapse.
-===Section {{isdaprov|9(e)(i)}} '''[[Counterpart]]s'''===
-There is an impassioned essay about the idiocy of [[counterparts]] clauses elsewhere<ref>In the [[counterparts]] article, as a matter of fact.</ref>.
-{{seealso}}
-*[[Mistake]]
-*[[Counterparts]]
-*[[Greenclose]]
-{{ISDA 2002 Section 9 TOC}}
-{{ref}}