Income Payment Date - 2000 GMSLA Provision

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
2000 GMSLA Anatomy™

In a Nutshell Clause Income Payment Date:

Income Payment Date:

view template

2000 GMSLA full text of Clause Income Payment Date:

Income Payment Date, with respect to any Securities or Collateral means the date on which Income is paid in respect of such Securities or Collateral, or, in the case of registered Securities or Collateral, the date by reference to which particular registered holders are identified as being entitled to payment of income;
view template

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

Premium version of this page

A clumsy definition in that it muddies entitlement to be paid income from payment date of Income, and when it comes to manufacturing dividends and income, it is the date of entitlement to payment that is important. Income Payment Date gets this right, after a fashion, for registered Securities, but even then there is a hanging and rather ambiguous “or”.

Or” as an exclusive disjunction

To make sense of it, this one needs this or to be an exclusive disjunction, whereas in the ordinary course, enthusiastic readers will know, the JC’s house view is that or is an inclusive disjunction. Clearly, for bearer paper the only material time is the point where there noteholder rocks up with its note or coupon and presents it for payment. For a registered security, the right to payment accrues on an Income Record Date, and it doesn't matter who holds the paper (or is registered as owner) on the payment date; the person who was registered on the record date gets the payment.

Nonetheless, the drafting makes rather a bosh of a simple question which — as I dare say the JC's own Nutshell drafting demonstrates — can be articulated quite easily.

Income Payment Date:

For this reason, the definition was rather improved by its successor in the 2010 GMSLA, “Income Record Date

And no, this is not a good example of where one should use “and/or”. There are no good examples of that.

See also