82,387
edits
Netting opinion: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{g}} | {{g}}The Good Lord bless the [[Netting opinion]]: no-one else who has yet spring left in its mortal coil will. | ||
Because God — manifesting {{sex|Herself}} this time in the guise of the [[Basel Committee on Banking Regulations and Supervisory Practices]] — has played a cruel cosmic joke on all [[inhouse lawyer]]s. By ''diktat'' of the latest [[Basel Accord]]) they must diligently read and draw reasoned conclusions from these God-forsaken tomes for ''each'' [[counterparty type]], in each jurisdiction in which they do business, so that their firm's financial controllers can recognise balance sheet reductions as a result. | It is, but is not ''just'', a [[legal opinion]] — at the best of times a dreary, charmless and pointless affair — but one addressing one of the most soul-obliterating questions a grown adult could pose: whether an insolvency administrator of an insolvent [[counterparty type|counterparty of a certain type]], in a certain jurisdiction, would be obliged to respect the [[close-out netting]] provisions under your [[master trading agreement]] should that [[counterparty]] go bust. | ||
Because God — manifesting {{sex|Herself}} this time in the guise of the [[Basel Committee on Banking Regulations and Supervisory Practices]] — has played a cruel cosmic joke on all [[inhouse lawyer]]s. By ''diktat'' of the latest [[Basel Accord]]) they must diligently read and draw reasoned conclusions from these God-forsaken tomes for ''each'' [[counterparty type]], in ''each'' jurisdiction in which they do business, for ''each'' [[master trading agreement]] they trade under, so that their firm's financial controllers can recognise balance sheet reductions as a result. | |||
[[Netting opinion]]s tend to be long, academic, laden with hypotheticals, appealing to [[Latin]]ate principles of civil law and demanding of unusually skilled powers of comprehension and patience — they are required by regulation to be, in fact — but when it comes down to it, they all say the same thing: that close-out {{tag|netting}} is, ultimately, enforceable: because a [[netting opinion]] would have no reason to exist if it said anything else. | [[Netting opinion]]s tend to be long, academic, laden with hypotheticals, appealing to [[Latin]]ate principles of civil law and demanding of unusually skilled powers of comprehension and patience — they are required by regulation to be, in fact — but when it comes down to it, they all say the same thing: that close-out {{tag|netting}} is, ultimately, enforceable: because a [[netting opinion]] would have no reason to exist if it said anything else. | ||