Pioneer Freight Futures Co Ltd v Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
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: