83,240
edits
Template:Failure to pay procedure: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Template:Failure to pay procedure (view source)
Revision as of 17:08, 4 January 2019
, 4 January 2019no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Terminating the {{isdama}} on this ground requires: | Terminating the {{isdama}} on this ground requires: | ||
*'''Failure''': A [[failure to pay]], on day T; | *'''Failure''': A [[failure to pay]], on day T; | ||
*'''Notice of failure''': The innocent party to give notice of the failure (which, [[Q.E.D.]], can be validly given ''only after'' [[close of business]] on the due date for payment or delivery (until then, the guilty party isn't technically “guilty”) and, by dint of Section {{isdaprov|12(a)}} ({{isdaprov|Notices}}), the notice will only be deemed effective on the following business day, T+1 | *'''Notice of failure''': The innocent party to give notice of the failure (which, [[Q.E.D.]], can be validly given ''only after'' [[close of business]] on the due date for payment or delivery (until then, the guilty party isn't technically “guilty”) and, by dint of Section {{isdaprov|12(a)}} ({{isdaprov|Notices}}), the notice will only be deemed effective on the following business day, T+1. | ||
:*'''Spod’s note''': This notice requirement is key from a {{isdaprov|Cross Default}} perspective<ref>If you have been indelicate enough to widen the scope of your cross default to include derivatives, that is.</ref>: if you don’t have it, ''any'' failure to pay under your {{isdama}}, however innocuous — even an operational oversight — automatically counts as an {{isdaprov|Event of Default}}, and gives a different person to the right to close ''their'' {{isdama}} with the {{isdaprov|counterparty}} because of it defaulted to you, even though (a) the counterparty hasn't defaulted to them, and (b) you have decided not to take any action against the counterparty yourself. | |||
*'''[[Grace Period]]''': After the notice of failure is delivered, the grace period must have expired (this depends on the ISDA edition you’re using: '''one''' under the {{2002isda}}; and '''three''' under the {{1992isda}}, and check also Part 5 of the ISDA {{isdaprov|Schedule}} to see if it has been amended specifically for the counterparty. <br> | *'''[[Grace Period]]''': After the notice of failure is delivered, the grace period must have expired (this depends on the ISDA edition you’re using: '''one''' under the {{2002isda}}; and '''three''' under the {{1992isda}}, and check also Part 5 of the ISDA {{isdaprov|Schedule}} to see if it has been amended specifically for the counterparty. <br> | ||
Therefore close of business T+2 (standard {{2002ma}}), T+4 (standard {{1992ma}}) | Therefore close of business T+2 (standard {{2002ma}}), T+4 (standard {{1992ma}}) | ||
*'''Section {{isdaprov|6(e)}} notice''': The {{isdaprov|notice of termination}} may only be served after close of business at the expiry of the grace period, so therefore the first day on which a termination notice following a failure to pay {{isdaprov|Event of Default}} can be effective under an ISDA is T+3 ({{2002isda}}) or T+5 {{1992isda}}. | *'''Section {{isdaprov|6(e)}} notice''': The {{isdaprov|notice of termination}} may only be served after close of business at the expiry of the grace period, so therefore the first day on which a termination notice following a failure to pay {{isdaprov|Event of Default}} can be effective under an ISDA is T+3 ({{2002isda}}) or T+5 {{1992isda}}. | ||