82,980
edits
Offices; Multibranch Parties - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions
Offices; Multibranch Parties - ISDA Provision (view source)
Revision as of 16:54, 20 September 2012
, 20 September 2012→Netting
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
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}} | |||
{{isdaanatomy}} | {{isdaanatomy}} | ||