Failure by either Party to deliver - GMSLA Provision: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{gmslaanat|9.3}}
{{gmslaanat|9.3}}
{{gmsla9commentary}}  
{{gmsla9commentary}}  
Note also the clear exclusion of indirect and [[consequential loss]]es, as well as losses to which the Transferee is contributorily negligent. If you are thinking I just made up the adjective "contributorily", and were about to conclude I'm maybe a bit ''[[reckless]]''<ref>I expect [[Mediocre lawyer|careful attorneys]] to be rolling around on the floor laughing at this ''bon mot''.</ref>* you might be interested to know it is actually a [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/contributorily word].
Note also the clear exclusion of indirect and [[consequential loss]]es, as well as losses to which the Transferee is contributorily [[negligent]]. If you are thinking I just made up the [[adjective]] “contributorily”, and were about to conclude I’m maybe a bit ''[[reckless]]''<ref>I expect [[Mediocre lawyer|careful attorneys]] to be rolling around on the floor laughing at this ''bon mot''.</ref>* you might be interested to know it is actually a [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/contributorily word].


===Replacement costs and isda hedging language===
===Replacement costs and ISDA hedging language===
Does it make sense to replace this clause with some convoluted shtick about the costs of replacement transactions or otherwise hedging the innocent party’s exposure? To determine follow this flow chart:  
Does it make sense to replace this clause with some convoluted shtick about the costs of replacement transactions or otherwise hedging the innocent party’s exposure? To determine follow this flow chart:  


Revision as of 12:03, 30 October 2019

GMSLA Anatomy™


In a Nutshell™ Clause 9.3:

9.3 Failure by either Party to deliver
Where a Party (the Transferor) fails to deliver Equivalent Securities or Collateral when due and the other Party (the Transferee) incurs interest, overdraft expenses or Buy in costs the Transferor must, within one Business Day of a demand, pay the Transferee and hold it harmless against those costs that arise directly from that failure other than (i) costs arising from the Transferee’s negligence or wilful default and (ii) any consequential losses).
view template

2010 GMSLA full text of Clause 9.3:

9.3 Failure by either Party to deliver: Where a Party (the Transferor) fails to deliver Equivalent Securities or Equivalent Collateral by the time required under this Agreement or within such other period as may be agreed between the Transferor and the other Party (the Transferee) and the Transferee:

(a) incurs interest, overdraft or similar costs and expenses; or
(b) incurs costs and expenses as a direct result of a Buy in exercised against it by a third party,

then the Transferor agrees to pay within one Business Day of a demand from the Transferee and hold harmless the Transferee with respect to all reasonable costs and expenses listed in sub paragraphs (a) and (b) above properly incurred which arise directly from such failure other than (i) such costs and expenses which arise from the negligence or wilful default of the Transferee and (ii) any indirect or consequential losses.
view template


2010 GMSLA: Full wikitext · Nutshell wikitext | GMLSA legal code | GMSLA Netting

Pledge GMSLA: Hard copy (ISLA) · Full wikitext · Nutshell wikitext |
1995 OSLA: OSLA wikitext | OSLA in a nutshell | GMSLA/PGMSLA/OSLA clause comparison table
From Our Friends On The Internet: Guide to equity finance | ISLA’s guide to securities lending for regulators and policy makers

Navigation
2010 GMSLA 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · Schedule · Agency Annex · Addendum for Pooled Principal Agency Loans

2018 Pledge GMSLA 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · Schedule · Agency Annex

Stock lending agreement comparison: Includes navigation for the 2000 GMSLA and the 1995 OSLA

Index: Click ᐅ to expand:
GMSLA
Pledge GMSLA
OSLA

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.


Mini close-out

See the discussion on mini close-out under the 2010 GMSLA (and the 1995 OSLA for that matter) and also the general discussion with regard to this clause in its wider context at clause 9.
Note also the clear exclusion of indirect and consequential losses, as well as losses to which the Transferee is contributorily negligent. If you are thinking I just made up the adjective “contributorily”, and were about to conclude I’m maybe a bit reckless[1]* you might be interested to know it is actually a word.

Replacement costs and ISDA hedging language

Does it make sense to replace this clause with some convoluted shtick about the costs of replacement transactions or otherwise hedging the innocent party’s exposure? To determine follow this flow chart:

Not called the vampire squid for nothing, you know.

See also

References

  1. ↑ I expect careful attorneys to be rolling around on the floor laughing at this bon mot.
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Failure_by_either_Party_to_deliver_-_GMSLA_Provision&oldid=34064"