No Agency - 1992 ISDA Provision

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
1992 ISDA Master Agreement

A Jolly Contrarian owner’s manual™

3(a)(vi) in a Nutshell

The JC’s Nutshell summaries are moving to the subscription-only ninja tier. For the cost of ½ a weekly 🍺 you can get them here. Sign up at Substack.

3(a)(vi) in all its glory

Manual amendment required — this provision is not in the 1992 ISDA

3(a)(vi) No Agency. It is entering into this Agreement, including each Transaction, as principal and not as agent of any person or entity.

Related agreements and comparisons

Related Agreements
Click here for the text of Section 3(a)(vi) in the 2002 ISDA
There isn’t an equivalent to Section 3(g) in the 1992 ISDA but parties used to routinely crowbar one in as an additional representation under a new Section 3(a)(vi). In a spooky piece of anticipation (and since latter-day 2002 refuseniks just copy paste the 2002 clause into their 1992 ISDA), they’re the same, as this comparison will demonstrate.

Resources and Navigation



If you are looking for a Section 3(a)(vi) in a 2002 ISDA, call off the police dogs: there is no such location. It is where one might have put a No Agency rep in a 1992 ISDA — but you modern types don’t need one of those. It’s already printed in a 2002 ISDA, at Section 3(g).



If you like a bit of agency chat, you might like our articles about principals and agents, undisclosed agents, undisclosed principals and all that good stuff.

Investment managers as agents

In practice, many ISDA Master Agreements are entered by agentsinvestment managers and asset managers (so-called “real money” managers) — on behalf of underlying principalsinvestment funds, and institutional clients who have appointed them as discretionary investment advisers.

These managers often enter transactions in aggregate and only allocate them to their underlying principals later in the day. This means that the broker will have a nervous few hours before it knows whom it is expected to sue if the principal doesn’t pony up on time. General principles of agency — in particular liability for an undisclosed principal —mean agents are not quite so footloose and fancy-free as many of them seem to believe.

Look, it is not the end of the world if your counterpart refuses to renounce all agency, as long as you set up the accounts correctly with the underlying principals, and the firm has a robust approach to trade allocation. Ultimately — and notwithstanding the nervous few hours pending allocation — the person against whom you are, long term, booking the trade is the principal.

Premium content

Here the free bit runs out. Subscribers click 👉 here. New readers sign up 👉 here and, for ½ a weekly 🍺 go full ninja about all these juicy topics 👇
  • The JC’s famous Nutshell summary of this clause

Template:M premium 1992 ISDA 3(a)(vi)


See also