Pioneer Freight Futures Co Ltd v Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "Pioneer Freight Futures Co Ltd v Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd [2011] 2 All ER (Comm) 1079") |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Pioneer Freight Futures Co Ltd v Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd [2011] 2 All ER (Comm) 1079 | Pioneer Freight Futures Co Ltd v Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd [2011] 2 All ER (Comm) 1079 | ||
{{2(a)(iii)}} |
Revision as of 16:05, 26 June 2012
Pioneer Freight Futures Co Ltd v Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd [2011] 2 All ER (Comm) 1079
Section 2(a)(iii) litigation
There is a (generous) handful of important authorities on the effect under English law or New York law of the suspension of obligations under the most litigationey clause in the ISDA Master Agreement, Section 2(a)(iii). They consider whether flawed asset provision amounts to an “ipso facto clause” under the US Bankruptcy Code or violates the “anti-deprivation” principle under English law. Those cases are: