Breach of Agreement - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
Why is Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(i)}} specifically carved out?  No good reason other than general [[ISDA]] neurosis/delight in over-communicating. Yes, it has its own separate {{isdaprov|Event of Default}}, with a much tighter timeline, so in practice one would never realistically trigger a [[failure to pay]] as a {{isdaprov|5(a)(ii)}} event, but it is still a bit fussy carving it out.  
Why is Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(i)}} specifically carved out?  No good reason other than general [[ISDA]] neurosis/delight in over-communicating. Yes, it has its own separate {{isdaprov|Event of Default}}, with a much tighter timeline, so in practice one would never realistically trigger a [[failure to pay]] as a {{isdaprov|5(a)(ii)}} event, but it is still a bit fussy carving it out.  


ISDA{{tm}}. Never knowingly outfussed.{{tm}}
''[[ISDA]]{{tm}}. Never knowingly outfussed.{{tm}}''
===It is an {{isdaprov|Event of Default}} not to supply {{isdaprov|documents for delivery}}===
===It is an {{isdaprov|Event of Default}} not to supply {{isdaprov|documents for delivery}}===