82,451
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 3: | Line 3: | ||
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. | 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 Accords|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 | 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 Accords|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. | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
And, make no mistake, across the ditch there is a strain of [[lawyer]] who quietly resents the tidal-wave of [[Common law|Anglo Saxon jurisprudence]] that has deluged the continent for its cross-border business. That the commercial affairs between a Belgian and an Italian should be adjudicated before the courts of England and Wales is a festering point. And he is just the sort to make his living — and thereby extract his revenge on the [[Common law|common law tradition]] — writing [[netting opinion]]s. | And, make no mistake, across the ditch there is a strain of [[lawyer]] who quietly resents the tidal-wave of [[Common law|Anglo Saxon jurisprudence]] that has deluged the continent for its cross-border business. That the commercial affairs between a Belgian and an Italian should be adjudicated before the courts of England and Wales is a festering point. And he is just the sort to make his living — and thereby extract his revenge on the [[Common law|common law tradition]] — writing [[netting opinion]]s. | ||
And [[Please be aware|be assured]] that this ''ressentiment'' runs ''deep''. For, when even a righteously incensed ''juriste'' must surely have had enough — as you leaf past page 93, hoping for sight of the first annex<ref>Being the dim light in a tunnel containing 17 of the blessed things.</ref> — you will find only a new section detailing specific rules protecting claims under the ''Insurance Sector Act''. You will see this and you will beat your fists on the ground, your voice will crack and you will cry, “WHY ARE YOU EXPOSTULATING ON THE TOPIC OF FIRE AND GENERAL INSURANCE I SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT”. But box on you must, and you know that this ''avocat à la cour'', in his pork-pie hat, will be enjoying a sweet pastry and schnapps with his friend the [[Belgian dentist]] , and as they clink glasses they will be thinking of your toil and torment, and they will be ''enjoying every minute of it''. | And [[Please be aware|be assured]] that this ''ressentiment'' runs ''deep''. For, when even a righteously incensed ''juriste'' must surely have had enough — as you leaf past page 93, hoping for sight of the first annex<ref>Being the dim light in a tunnel containing 17 of the blessed things.</ref> — you will find only a new section detailing specific rules protecting claims under the ''Insurance Sector Act''. You will see this and you will beat your fists on the ground, your voice will crack and you will cry, “WHY ARE YOU EXPOSTULATING ON THE TOPIC OF FIRE AND GENERAL INSURANCE I SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT”. But box on you must, and you know that this ''avocat à la cour'', in his pork-pie hat, will be enjoying a sweet pastry and schnapps with his friend the [[Belgian dentist]] , and as they clink glasses they will be thinking of your toil and torment, and they will be ''enjoying every goddamn minute of it''. | ||
===[[Red Flag Act]]=== | ===[[Red Flag Act]]=== | ||