Counterparts and Confirmations - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{fullanat2|isda|9(e)|1992|9(e)|2002}}
{{fullanat2|isda|9(e)|1992|9(e)|2002}}
{{comm}}
{{comm}}
There is an impassioned essay about the idiocy of [[counterparts]] clauses elsewhere<ref>In the [[counterparts]] article, as a matter of fact.</ref>. Note the addition of [[e-mail]] to the 2002 version. this caused all kinds of fear and loathing amongst the judiciary, when asked about it, as can be seen in the frightful case of {{casenote|Greenclose|National Westminster Bank plc}}.
There is an impassioned essay about the idiocy of [[counterparts]] clauses elsewhere<ref>In the [[counterparts]] article, as a matter of fact.</ref>.  
 
Note also the addition of [[e-mail]] as a means of communication to the 2002 version (email not really having been a “thing” in 1992). This caused all kinds of fear and loathing amongst the judiciary, when asked about it, as can be seen in the frightful case of {{casenote|Greenclose|National Westminster Bank plc}}.Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.


{{seealso}}
{{seealso}}

Navigation menu