82,891
edits
Offices; Multibranch Parties - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Offices; Multibranch Parties - ISDA Provision (view source)
Revision as of 13:34, 11 April 2017
, 11 April 2017→Netting
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
While, by dint of the legal personality, it wouldn’t make any difference under English or New York law, and really shouldn’t anywhere else, there are those jurisdictions which are not so theroetically pure in their conceptualisation of the corporate form. Your counterparty may have the misfortune to be incorporated in such a place. | While, by dint of the legal personality, it wouldn’t make any difference under English or New York law, and really shouldn’t anywhere else, there are those jurisdictions which are not so theroetically pure in their conceptualisation of the corporate form. Your counterparty may have the misfortune to be incorporated in such a place. | ||
If so, the validity of close-out [[netting]] against that entity may indeed depend on the branch from which it transacts - and indeed there is a possibility that the governing law of the jurisdiction of the branch may endeavour to intervene (particularly relevant if it has assets). Another reason, perhaps, to disapply the “multibranch party” for a counterparty incorporated in such a jurisdiction. The way to check this is at the netting opinion review sheet contains the following question: | If so, the validity of close-out [[netting]] against that entity may indeed depend on the branch from which it transacts - and indeed there is a possibility that the governing law of the jurisdiction of the branch may [[endeavour]] to intervene (particularly relevant if it has assets). Another reason, perhaps, to disapply the “multibranch party” for a counterparty incorporated in such a jurisdiction. The way to check this is at the netting opinion review sheet contains the following question: | ||
{{box|Does the opinion confirm that close-out netting under the agreement is enforceable notwithstanding the inclusion of branches in non-netting jurisdictions? Yes/No}} | {{box|Does the opinion confirm that close-out netting under the agreement is enforceable notwithstanding the inclusion of branches in non-netting jurisdictions? Yes/No}} | ||
{{isdaanatomy}} | {{isdaanatomy}} | ||